Dufferin Peel Catholic District School Board

REGULAR BOARD MEETINGAGENDA

Date: Tuesday, April 7, 2015

Time: 7:30 pm

Location: Catholic Education Centre - Board Room

802 Drury Lane

Burlington, Ontario

Pages

1. Call to Order

1.1 Opening Prayer (J. Barron)

1.2 Motions Adopted/Information Received In-Camera

2. Approval of the Agenda

3. Declarations of Conflict of Interest

4. Presentations

5. Delegations

5.1 Primary and Middle Years International Baccalaureate (IB) Program (L. Dub /E.Neghina)

1 - 17

6. Approval of Minutes

6.1 Special Board Meeting - March 24, 2015 18 - 27

7. Business Arising from Previous Meetings

7.1 Summary of Outstanding Items from Previous Meetings 28 - 28

8. Action Items

8.1 Response to Delegation (J. Michael)

8.2 2015-2016 School Year Calendar (C. McGillicuddy) 29 - 31

9. Staff Reports

9.1 Halton Student Transportation Services (HSTS) Bell Time Efficiencies (P. McMahon) 32 - 32

10. Information Items

10.1 Student Trustee Update

10.2 Educational Field Trips (T. Overholt) 33 - 34

10.3 Release of the 2015-2016 Grant for Student Needs (GSN) (P. McMahon) 35 - 165

10.4 Release of the Revised Pupil Accommodation Review Guidelines (Version 3) (P.McMahon)

166 - 240

1

10.5 Halton Student Transportation Services (HSTS) 2013-2014 Annual Report (P.McMahon)

241 - 267

10.6 Walk with Jesus (L. Naar) 268 - 269

10.7 Oakville Secondary School Boundary Review Update (T. Pinelli/C. Cipriano) 270 - 335

10.8 Georgetown Elementary Boundary Review Update (T. Overholt/L. Naar) 336 - 337

10.9 April is Aboriginal Education Awareness Month at HCDSB (J. Nigro) 338 - 339

11. Miscellaneous Information

11.1 OCSTA - Resolutions for the 2015 OCSTA AGM (J. Michael) 340 - 389

12. Correspondence

12.1 2015 Health and Physical Education Curriculum (G. Skora, S. Pietras, L. Guilherme,T. & L. Jachymek)

390 - 393

13. Open Question Period

14. In Camera

15. Resolution re Absentees

16. Adjournment and Closing Prayer (M. Rowe)

2

Primary and Middle Year Programmes

April 2015 1

Purpose of the presentation today

To make our Board aware that a Primary and or Middle

Years IB Programme should be implemented into our

school system.

It is a competitive , diverse and Global Changing World.

This program will prepare our children into the next

century.

The IB program will actively engage in the ongoing process

of bringing Catholic Principals of Equity, Justice and

Compassion to the many communities of which all students

are a part of. 2

IB Mission Statement The International Baccalaureate aims to develop inquiring,

knowledgeable and caring young people who help to create

a better and more peaceful world through intercultural

understanding and respect.

To this end the organization works with schools, governments

and international organizations to develop challenging

programmes of international education and rigorous

assessment. These programmes encourage students across

the world to become active, compassionate and lifelong

learners who understand that other people, with their

differences, can also be right.

3

Primary Year Programme (PYP)

PYP Programme is designed for Students aged 3-12 years

Curriculum based around six transdisciplinary themes: 1. WHO WE ARE 2. WHERE WE ARE IN PLACE AND TIME 3. HOW WE EXPRESS OURSELVES 4. HOW THE WORLD WORKS 5. HOW WE ORGANIZE OURSELVES 6. SHARING THE PLANET

4

Primary Year Programme (PYP)

5

Middle Year Programme(MYP)

MYP Programme is designed for students aged 11-16 years

Curriculum focus on six ‘needs 1. GLOBAL 2. INTELLECTUAL 3. PERSONAL 4. PHYSICAL 5. CREATIVE 6. SOCIAL

7

Middle Year Programme(MYP)

8

IB statistics: then and now

10

IB Programme Locations in GTA (PYP and MYP) Toronto District School Board Milne Valley Middle School (grade 6, 7, 8) authorized IB Middle Year Programme school since July 2008 Windfields Junior High School (grades 7, 8, 9) authorized IB Middle Year Programme school since May 2008 Peel District School Board WG Davis Sr. Public School- Brampton (grades 6,7,8) authorized 3 year Middle Year Programme since 2014 Dufferin Peel Catholic District School Board The Catholic Global Learning Centre at the St. James School Site- Primary Year Programme (*Candidate School) Private Schools 12 Private schools - (Primary and Middle Year Programmes) 11

http://www.tdsb.on.ca/FindYour/Schools.aspx?schno=3196

http://www.tdsb.on.ca/FindYour/Schools.aspx?schno=3342

http://schools.peelschools.org/1573/Pages/default.aspx

Benefit of IB Programmes (PYP and MYP) in the Halton Catholic School Board

• Keep up with changes/ challenges

• Be competitive with other Boards

• Better learning foundation for our children

• Attract new Students

• Proven Success of the IB Diploma programme ( St. Thomas

Aquinas)

12

Why at St. John- Oakville?

St. John would be an ideal school for Middle Year IB Programme

(MYP)

• Space available

• Central Location (close proximity to STA)

• Currently no Programs offered at St. John

• Underutilized technology in our school funded by council (IPad's,

Smartboards)

Introducing an IB program at our School would also help

• Improve enrollment

• Improve school rank- EQAO scores

• Reduce number of families leaving our school- looking for enhanced

learning programs such as French Immersion, Art programs, ...) 13

Proposal/ Recommendation

• Introduce Middle Year Programme as it will link into our very

successful High School IB Diploma Programme currently

offered at St. Thomas Aquinas (STA)

• Implement The Middle Year Programme as soon as possible -

takes a couple years to be accredited. Time is at the essence

• Consider The IB Middle Year Programme in the Current Budget

discussion

14

Cost Advantages

IB World Schools pay an 'annual school fee' for each programme they are authorized to teach. If schools offer two or more programmes, they pay a reduced fee to reflect their greater commitment. IB World Schools offering TWO programmes from a combination of PYP, MYP and DP receive a 10% discount, which is calculated on the single lowest fee.

15

What do students think ??

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TwUSbP5eHR0

16

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TwUSbP5eHR0

Education for a Better World

17

Subject to Approval

18

Business Arising from Previous Meetings – 15 04 07 Page 1

ITEM 7.1

BUSINESS ARISING FROM PREVIOUS MEETINGS

DATE OF THE BOARD MEETING

AGENDA ITEM ACTION REQUIRED RESPONSIBILITY STATUS

NIL Report

28

School Year Calendar 2015-2016 Page 1 of 2

Regular Board Meeting Tuesday, April 7, 2015

ACTION REPORT ITEM 8.2

SCHOOL YEAR CALENDAR 2015 - 2016

PURPOSE: The Education Act requires each school Board to establish a School Year Calendar, identifying instructional days, professional activity days and holidays for each school year. The Ministry of Education establishes the number of days for the schools of the Province and in accordance with Regulation 304, each Board is required to submit a Board-approved calendar to the Ministry of Education by May 1, 2015. BACKGROUND: The School Year Calendar Committee takes into account several considerations:

1. School communities have generally advised that, when selecting a professional activity Day, a Friday or Monday is preferred. Some employers appear more willing to permit parents to have occasional holidays on those days (or just before statutory holidays).

2. An essential factor in the establishment of the 2015 - 2016 calendar is the integration of

transportation services with our coterminous Board. Consultation, which complies with Ministry direction, has occurred with the Halton District School Board.

COMMENTS: The 2015 - 2016 School Year Calendar Committee is comprised of a parent representative of the Catholic Parent Involvement Committee (CPIC), OECTA Unit Presidents (Elementary and Secondary), CUPE 3166 and 5200 Representatives, Principal Association representatives and a trustee. The Committee met on February 26, 2015 for the purpose of preparing a draft calendar.

The 2015 - 2016 School Year Calendar consists of one hundred and eighty-eight (188) instructional days, of which ten (10) days (five (5) per semester) are classified as secondary school examination days as per Regulation 304. An additional six (6) Professional Activity Days are added on to the calendar throughout the year.

Two (2) PA days will be used for assessment and completion of report cards at the elementary level. An additional PA Day will be used for Elementary Parent/Teacher Interviews. The two (2) mandatory Provincial Priority PA Days that will occur next year will be devoted to the criteria established by the Ministry. One has been set for school improvement planning. The second day will support staff development in the area of inquiry learning.

29

School Year Calendar 2015-2016 Page 2 of 2

At the time of this writing, five (5) of the six (6) elementary professional activity days align with the Halton District School Board. Five (5) of the six (6) secondary professional activity days align with the Halton District School Board and both boards will have the same secondary school examination days. The professional development day that is not in alignment takes place before the beginning of classes in September when no buses are running, which means that there are no transportation related budgetary implications.

CONCLUSION: The proposed 2015-2016 School Year Calendar was presented to trustees as a Staff Report at the March 24, 2014 Special Board Meeting and is now being presented as an Action Item. Once approved, the proposed School Year Calendar will be forwarded to the Ministry of Education for final consent. RECOMMENDATION: RESOLUTION MOVED BY: SECONDED BY: RESOLVED, that the Halton Catholic District School Board approve the 2015 - 2016 School Year Calendar as presented. REPORT PREPARED C. MCGILLICUDDY AND SUBMITTED BY: SUPERINTENDENT OF EDUCATION REPORT APPROVED BY: P. DAWSON DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION AND SECRETARY OF THE BOARD

30

SCHOOL YEAR CALENDAR

2015 - 2016

STUDENTS DO NOT ATTEND SCHOOL ON THESE DAYS

Date Elementary Schools Secondary Schools Wednesday, September 2, 2015 School Improvement Planning School Improvement Planning

Friday, October 9, 2015 Faith Day Faith Day

Friday, November 27, 2015 Parent/Teacher Interviews 21st Century Learning

Friday, February 5, 2016 Report Card Writing Curriculum Review – Semester 1

Friday, April 22, 2016 Inquiry Based Learning Inquiry Based Learning

Friday, June 3, 2016 Report Card Writing N/A

Friday, June 30, 2016 N/A Curriculum Review – Semester II

Instructional School days – Elementary 188 Instructional School days – Secondary 188 Total School days – Elementary 194 Total School days – Secondary 194 First day of instruction for all students Tuesday, September 8, 2015 Last day of instruction for elementary students Thursday, June 30, 2016 Last day of instruction for secondary students Wednesday, June 29, 2016 Examination Days (Secondary) January 28, 29; February 1, 2, 3 (five days) June 22, 23, 24, 27, 28 (five days)

SCHOOL BREAKS, STATUTORY HOLIDAYS

AND BOARD DESIGNATED HOLIDAYS September 7, 2015 Labour Day October 12, 2015 Thanksgiving Day December 21, 2015 to January 1, 2016 (inclusive) Christmas Break February 15, 2016 Family Day March 14 – 18, 2016(inclusive) March Break March 25, 2016 Good Friday March 28, 2016 Easter Monday May 23, 2016 Victoria Day

31

Halton Student Transportation Services (HSTS) Bell Time Efficiencies Review Page 1 of 1


STAFF REPORT ITEM 9.1

HALTON STUDENT TRANSPORTATION SERVICES (HSTS) BELL TIME EFFICIENCIES REVIEW

PURPOSE:

To inform the Board that the HSTS Board of Directors is proposing a consortium wide bell time review for both the elementary and secondary panels to identify further cost efficiencies in the daily operations of HSTS.

COMMENTS:

At this year’s HSTS Annual Trustee Planning and Consultation Meeting on March 3, 2015, Kelly Amos, Chair of the Halton District School Board (HDSB), inquired if the Halton Catholic District School Board (HCDSB) would be interested in reviewing and modifying school bell times at both the elementary and secondary panels to potentially identify further operational efficiencies. Jane Michael, Chair of the HCDSB, indicated she would bring the matter forward to the HCDSB Board of Trustees for further discussion.

As the HSTS is mandated by the Ministry’s Effectiveness & Efficiencies Review to continue finding operational efficiencies on an ongoing basis, the Board of Directors agreed that a request should be made to HCDSB and HDSB’s respective Board of Trustees to retain a third party consultant to undertake a bell time review to identify potential route efficiencies/cost savings. The results of the study would provide HSTS with an updated service provision baseline following the departure of the two French boards.

If both Boards are amenable to undertaking a study, staff from both Boards will coordinate with HSTS to develop study parameters. CONCLUSION:

In an effort to continue identifying cost efficiencies in ongoing operations of HSTS, the Board of Directors is requesting that the Board of Trustees of both HCDSB and HDSB approve the undertaking of a consortium wide bell time review. If both Boards are interested in moving forward, staff will bring forward an action report to the next HCDSB Regular Board meeting on April 21, 2015. REPORT PREPARED BY: F. THIBEAULT ADMINISTRATOR, PLANNING SERVICES REPORT SUBMITTED BY: P. MCMAHON

SUPERINTENDENT OF BUSINESS SERVICES AND TREASURER OF THE BOARD REPORT APPROVED BY: P. DAWSON DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION AND SECRETARY OF THE BOARD

32

Listed by Destination

33

Release of 2015-16 Grant for Student Needs (GSN) Page 1 of 4


INFORMATION REPORT ITEM 10.3

RELEASE OF 2015-16 GRANT FOR STUDENT NEEDS (GSN)

PURPOSE: To provide the Board with information regarding the release of the 2015-16 Grant for Student Needs (GSN). BACKGROUND: The following information regarding the Board’s 2015-16 budget process was previously provided to Trustees:

1. Staff Report 9.1 – February 17, 2015 Regular Board Meeting – 2015-16 Budget Estimates Schedule and Objectives.

COMMENTS: The Ministry announced the release of the GSN on Thursday, March 26, 2015 via webcast. The PowerPoint slide presentation from the webcast is attached as Appendix A. Four Ministry Memoranda related to the GSN have been issued: • Memorandum 2015:B07 “Grants for Student Needs Funding for 2015–16” (Appendix B) • Memorandum 2015:B08 “2015-16 School Year Education Programs – Other (EPO)

Funding” (Appendix C) • Memorandum 2015:SB04 “Update on the School Condition Improvement Funding Program and

the Condition Assessment Program (Appendix D) • Memorandum 2015:SB05 “Special Education Funding in 2015-16” (Appendix E). The Board submitted enrolment projections to the Ministry on December 2, 2014, in accordance with Ministry 2014:SB26 Memorandum - District School Board Enrolment Projections from 2015-16 to 2018-19. The Ministry used this submission to project the 2015-16 funding allocation for the Board. The last page of Appendix F shows that the Ministry projects the Board’s 2015-16 funding allocation to be $332,960,974 which is an increase of approximately 2.4% over the Revised Estimates for 2014-15. The projected enrolment for 2015-16 is estimated at 32,372, or 2.5% higher than the projected 2014-15 Revised Estimates enrolment. Thus, the overall impact on our Board appears to

35


be a decrease in funding of 0.1%, which is the net effect of the various GSN reductions and the enrolment growth expected for our Board. In reviewing these projections, it should be noted that the Ministry Board by Board projections are preliminary in nature, and keep in mind the following: • They only reflect the revenue side and do not take into account expenses for the year and

therefore they are not a reflection of our potential surplus or deficit position. • They are high level Ministry projections for the 2015-16 year, built on and compared to

projections for the current year (2014-15 Revised Estimates are based on the actual enrolment count on October 31 and a projected enrolment count for March 31).

• The Education Finance Information System (EFIS) forms will not be released until the end of April. They are used to calculate all aspects of the grants specific to our Board, and as such, will supersede the projection.

• Enrolment projections for 2015-16 (which drive the majority of our grants) are subject to revision up until the budget is passed in June, based on the actual enrolment for March 31 of this year and school registrations for next year.

• Based on the above points, Board by Board comparisons are premature at this time. The 2015-16 changes in the GSN relate to the following 4 areas:

1. Phasing out of the top-up funding for underutilized schools, 2. Lower funding for small schools that are not isolate or combined, 3. Reduced geographic circumstances grant, and 4. Reduced declining enrolment funding.

For our Board, only the first two will have an impact. There have also been changes in the allocation and eligibility for various capital grants, and the new Pupil Accommodation Review Guidelines have been released in contemplation of the funding reductions related to this area. The table below outlines the main elements of the funding allocation year over year increase:

2015-16 % Increase fromProjected Funding 2014-15 Rev Est

788 2.5%4,150,876$ 2.5%

320,770$ 1.5%929,606$ 2.3%748,885$ 3.0%287,866$ 4.2%116,713$ 1.4%742,834$ 2.5%497,293$ 1.9%

7,794,843$ 2.4%

Overall GSN Impact to the Board -0.1%

Increase in Student Transportation Grant (Note 5)

Total Funding Increase Before Capital Programs

Increase in School Foundation Allocation (Note 2)Increase in Special Education Allocation (Note 3)Increase in Cost Adjustment & Teacher Qualifications and Experience Grant (Note4)

Increase in School Board Administration and Governance Grant (Note 6)Increase in School Operations Allocation (Note 7)Various other grant increases (Note 8)

Increase in 2015-16 Funding

Total Forecasted Enrolment IncreaseIncrease in Pupil Foundation Allocation (Note 1)

(based on School Board Funding Projections outlined in Appendix F)

36


Note 1: Increase in Pupil Foundation Allocation matches the proportion of expected enrolment growth. Note 2: The School Foundation Allocation incorporates growth based on forecasted enrolment increase, which is in part offset by the decrease in the funding base for support staff and administration in small schools. Note 3: Special Education Allocation has increased in part due to forecasted enrolment growth, and in part due to the new funding formula for the High Needs Amount, which reallocates funding across the province and is being phased in over four years. Note 4: The Cost Adjustment and Teacher Qualifications and Experience Grant has increased to reflect the additional Teaching staff and Early Childhood Educators required to address the enrolment growth. Historically this projected grant has differed significantly from the Revised Estimates amount calculated based on the actual staffing complement in our system as at October 31. The reduction in this grant has been, in past years, as high as 10% (or $2.5 million). Once the EFIS forms are available, and our staffing complement is input into the tables, a better estimate of this grant will be available. Note 5: The Student Transportation Grant has increased to reflect the enrolment growth, as well as expected increases in transportation costs and fuel price changes. The 2015-16 GSN incorporates a 2% increase to keep up with costs, similar with previous years. Note 6: The School Board Administration and Governance Grant has increased in part due to increase in enrolment, and in part as a result of the phasing in of the new funding model, announced in 2014-15. Note 7: The School Operations Allocation reflects the second area of funding reductions in the GSN, as the top-up funding grant is being phased out over the next 3 years. This reduction however is more than offset by the 7.3% increase to the non-staffing portion of the School Operations Allocation to help the Board with higher utility and energy costs. Further, this grant also reflects the forecasted increase in enrolment. Note 8: Various grant increases were also experienced for the Language Grant, Learning Opportunities Grant, Continuing Education Grant, School Renewal Allocation and Interest Expense. Staff are in the process of compiling the budget for the 2015-16 expenses, and are focusing their attention on:

1. Salary budget, determined based on the March 31, 2015 staffing data pull down from the Board’s HR and Payroll system (iSYS Works).

2. Benefits budget, adjusted based on 2014-15 expenditures to date and Mosey and Mosey’s annual Group Benefits Renewal Report, typically issued in June.

3. Non-salary budgets are being compiled for all departments. 4. School Budgets are developed based on projected enrolment, and will require adjustment as

enrolment updates become available.

37


5. Student Transportation preliminary budget has been received; however changes are expected as enrolment updates become available and the eligibility for transportation is determined.

6. New initiatives will be prioritized to identify the critical ones that are required to be included in the 2015-16 budget, should funding be available.

7. EFIS forms, expected to be released at the end of April, will be used to calculate all grants for our Board. Expenses are included at this time as well, to assess the enveloping provisions.

8. Enrolments are subject to revision up until the budget is passed in June. Enrolment changes may be required once the actual enrolment for March 31, 2015 is available, and as a result of school registrations for next year occurring between April 1 and mid June 2015.

It is expected that the increase in expenses will equal or exceed the projected revenue increase, once all data is entered into the Ministry’s EFIS forms. The updated 2015-16 Budget Estimates Schedule is attached as Appendix G. The 2015-16 Education Funding: Consultation Summary document is attached as Appendix H. REPORT PREPARED BY: R. NEGOI SENIOR ADMINISTRATOR, FINANCIAL SERVICES REPORT SUBMITTED BY: P. MCMAHON SUPERINTENDENT OF BUSINESS AND TREASURER OF THE BOARD REPORT APPROVED BY: P. DAWSON DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION AND SECRETARY OF THE BOARD

38

2015-16 Grants for Student Needs

TECHNICAL BRIEFING

March 26, 2015

Appendix A

39

Purpose • To provide school boards and other key stakeholders with an

overview of the major new elements that make up the Grants for Students Needs (GSN) for 2015-16: 1. School Board Efficiencies and Modernization (SBEM)

strategy; 2. Keeping up with costs; 3. Other Items; 4. Capital; 5. Working together.

NOTE that a regulation to govern grants to school boards in their 2015–16 fiscal year has not yet been made. The information in this presentation is provided in the absence of such a regulation. The initiatives and investments described herein must be implemented by, and are conditional upon, the making of such a regulation by the Lieutenant Governor in Council.

1 40

Overview of 2015–16 GSN • Projected to be stable year-over-year at $22.46 billion, an average of

$11,451 per pupil. • Continues to build efficiencies into the funding model by expanding

SBEM incentives and supports for boards to make more efficient use of school space.

• This is a time to prioritize and align funding to best achieve Ontario’s renewed goals for education:

2 41

Consultation • The 2015–16 GSN reflects extensive consultations with school

boards and a broad range of education stakeholders. • Most recent education funding consultations with stakeholders were

in the fall of 2014. – A summary of these consultations is now available on the

Ministry website. • Consultations on the Pupil Accommodation Review Guideline

(PARG) also conducted in fall/winter of 2014/2015.

3 42

Historic Context

4

$14.4B $15.2B

$15.9B $16.6B $17.1B

$18.1B $18.9B $19.5B

$20.4B $21.3B $21.6B $21.7B $22.4B $22.5B

1,850,000

1,900,000

1,950,000

2,000,000

2,050,000

2,100,000

2,150,000

2,200,000

$0.0B

$5.0B

$10.0B

$15.0B

$20.0B

$25.0B

2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15RE

2015-16Proj

Aver

age

Dai

ly E

nrol

men

t

Gra

nts

for S

tude

nt N

eeds

Note: To provide a clear year-over-year comparison, FDK funding, which was previously outside the GSN, has been added. The increase in enrolment is as a result of FDK.

43

1. School Board Efficiencies and Modernization (SBEM)

44

SBEM Strategy Launched • SBEM was introduced in 2014-15 to provide incentives and supports for

boards to make more efficient use of school space – an important priority for the province.

6

What Stakeholders Said SBEM Pillars

Underutilized space is a significant issue.

Pillar 1: Further revisions to grants to incent boards to make more efficient use of school space, many phased in over three years. Pillar 2: Revisions to the Pupil Accommodation Review Guideline (PARG) to ensure boards have a more effective tool to address needs to consolidate facilities while continuing to ensure constructive public input.

Investments needed to realize savings over the longer term.

Pillar 3: School Consolidation Capital (SCC) program funding. Pillar 4: Capital Planning Capacity Program.

Continued and meaningful consultation with the education sector on a regular basis

Pillar 5: Education funding consultations with stakeholders in the fall 2014. PARG consultations conducted in fall/winter 2014 and early 2015. Ministry will hold regional information sessions on the 2015–16 GSN for school board officials in Spring 2015.

45

SBEM Strategy in 2015-16

• In 2015–16, the Ministry will broaden SBEM with measures to: – Further encourage the management of underutilized school space, while

maintaining support for the schools that need it most; and – Update and modernize the funding formula.

• Changes to: 1. Top-up funding, adjustment factors and cost benchmarks under the School

Facility Operations and Renewal Grant; 2. School Foundation Grant; 3. Geographic Circumstances Grant; and 4. Declining Enrolment Adjustment.

• With the exception of the Declining Enrolment Adjustment, the changes introduced in 2015–16 will be phased in over three years.

7 46

1. School Facility Operations and Renewal Grant Top-up funding and reinvestment (Three-year phase in) • Base Top-up funding phased out in three years.

– Enhanced Top-up continues: Schools eligible under the new criteria in 2015–16 will be funded at 100 percent of capacity under the new allocation method.

o New criteria for eligibility.

– Portion of the funding released in each year of the phase out of Base Top-up will be reinvested in the per-pupil operating and renewal cost benchmarks.

o This realignment is intended to redirect funding from underutilized space to serve pupils in all schools across the province.

– In addition, three board-specific School Facility Operations and Renewal adjustment factors – geographic adjustment, facility age, supplementary area – will be updated to reflect current school inventory data.

8 47

1. School Facility Operations and Renewal Grant (continued) New criteria for Enhanced Top-up (Three-year phase in) • Reduced distance threshold:

Elementary: Any elementary school facility is eligible that is at least 10 km away from any other school facility of the board (elementary or secondary).

Secondary: Any secondary school facility is eligible that is at least 20 km away from any other secondary school facility of the board.

• Current criteria used to determine eligibility for Enhanced Top-up funding will be phased out.

9 48

2. School Foundation Grant (Three-year phase in)

• New allocation model to recognize three different types of schools: supported, distant, and regular.

• Overall impact is a net investment in schools: – Increased support for secondary vice-principals, scaled at a rate of 1 FTE to

500 ADE, starting once a school is eligible for 1 principal FTE. – All combined schools – supported, distant, or regular – will receive funding for

1 additional principal FTE at a threshold of 350 students (with at least 100 elementary students and at least 100 secondary students) o Previous threshold was 300 elementary and 500 secondary students.

• New model is intended to redirect funding from very small schools that are not isolated to larger schools, remote schools, or schools that serve both elementary and secondary students.

10 49

3. Geographic Circumstances Grant (Three-year phase in)

Remote and Rural & Rural and Small Community Allocations • Updated factors in the Remote and Rural Allocation.

– Changes will reflect more up-to-date geographic data, including more current road networks, population data, and urban centres with a population of at least 200,000

– Distance factor will now be measured from the board head office instead of the geographic centre of the board.

• As the Ministry has both made investments and put in place protections for boards and schools in rural and remote communities, a decision has been made to phase out the Rural and Small Communities Allocation as part of a balanced overall package of changes.

Supported Schools Allocation • Elementary and secondary supported schools will generate funding for a minimum of one

teacher. • Funding through the Supported Schools Allocation for schools that generate sufficient funding

for teachers (≥ 7.5 elementary, ≥ 14 secondary) through the Pupil Foundation Grant will be eliminated.

11 50

4. Declining Enrolment Adjustment

(Full implementation in 2015–16)

• Grant will be reduced to encourage school boards to adjust more quickly to declining enrolment: – The Remote and Rural Allocation and the per-pupil components of

the School Board Administration and Governance Grant through the first year component of the Declining Enrolment Adjustment will be 50 percent rather than 100 percent.

– The second year component will be 25 percent of the first year component.

– The third year will be eliminated.

12 51

2. Keeping Up With Costs

52

Making Investments Student Transportation • Funding for student transportation will increase by 2 percent to help boards manage

increased costs. o As in previous years, this cost update will be netted against a school board’s

transportation surplus. • Starting in 2015–16, transportation services for residential students at English-

language Provincial and Demonstration schools will be delivered by the Ministry’s Provincial Schools Branch.

• The Ministry will work with school boards and transportation consortia to begin collecting and analyzing data to better understand student transportation delivery in Ontario.

Utilities • The non-staff portion of the School Operations Allocation benchmark will again be

increased by 2 percent to help boards manage increases in commodity prices. • As in 2014-15, the electricity component of the benchmark will increase by 7.3%

based on the Ministry of Energy’s most recent Long-Term Energy Plan.

14 53

3. Other Items

54

School Board Administration Funding

• The Ministry is continuing with the four-year implementation of the new School Board Administration and Governance Grant allocation model, as communicated in 2014-15.

• Under the new model, three of the Grant’s allocations – the Directors and Supervisory Officers Allocation, the Board Administration Allocation, and the Multiple Municipalities Allocation – will become a single Board Administration Allocation made up of ten core functions. The remaining allocations in the Grant are unaffected.

• In 2015–16, 50 percent of the funding to boards is being generated using the 2013–14 allocation model, while the remaining 50 percent will be allocated by applying the new model parameters.

16 55

Special Education High Needs Amount

• The Ministry is continuing with the four-year implementation of the new High Needs Amount (HNA) allocation model, as communicated in 2014-15. In 2015–16, the Ministry will:

– Continue to eliminate the legacy HNA per-pupil amounts, which will only be funded at 50 percent in 2015–16.

– Increase the proportion of funding that is allocated through both the HNA Measures of Variability Amount (MOV) and the Special Education Statistical Prediction Model (SESPM).

– Maintain High Needs Base Amount for Collaboration and Integration at $450,000 per board.

– Maintain the current funding levels of the HNA allocation at $1,050 million during this four-year transition. This will provide school boards with stability and it will mitigate projected enrolment declines in 2014-15 and 2015-16.

17 56

Accountability Learning Opportunities Grant

• Six allocations in the Learning Opportunities Grant will be enveloped as a group starting in 2015–16:

1. Literacy and Math Outside the School Day Allocation

2. Student Success, Grades 7 to 12 Allocation

3. Grade 7 and 8 Literacy and Numeracy and Student Success Teachers

4. School Effectiveness Framework Allocation

5. Ontario Focused Intervention Partnership (OFIP) Tutoring Allocation

6. Specialist High Skills Major (SHSM) Allocation

• Purpose is to ensure these allocations, which directly support programs to improve student achievement, continue to be focussed on students and school effectiveness

• Enveloping applies to the sum of the six allocations, not to each allocation separately. – Does not replace current program reporting or evaluation requirements specific to

any one of the allocations. – Does not apply to Demographic Allocation.

18 57

Accountability (continued) Safe and Accepting Schools Supplement • Ministry will introduce enhanced reporting requirements for the Safe and Accepting

Schools Allocation. – These requirements will complement the reporting already in place for the Urban and

Priority High Schools Allocation.

Board Administration and Governance • A board’s net administration and governance expenses in a fiscal year must not

exceed the administration and governance limit. The Ministry will be reviewing board compliance with this limit.

FDK and Primary Class Size Compliance • Starting with the 2014–15 results, the Ministry may take action, including applying

GSN cash withholdings, if a board’s FDK and primary class sizes are not in compliance with the Class Size regulation for two school years in a row.

19 58

Education Programs – Other (EPO) • The government will continue to support other education initiatives

that advance student achievement with investments outside the GSN.

• Similar to last year, the ministry will release a B memo today to provide boards with funding allocations for their 2015-16 school year.

• The Ministry is confirming today that more than $180M in funding will be allocated to sustain supports to priority education initiatives in the 2015-16 school year.

20 59

Other Items Collective Bargaining • As in 2014–15, GSN funding for compensation and other labour costs in

2015–16 will reflect the current situation under the statutory freeze provisions of the Labour Relations Act.

• Beginning in 2015–16, boards will be provided with necessary funding through the School Board Administration and Governance Grant to support the labour relations activities of their respective trustees’ associations.

School Authorities • Funding for school authorities will be adjusted in 2015–16, as appropriate,

to reflect changes in funding to district school boards.

Due Dates for Submissions • Board Estimates for 2015–16 due June 30, 2015.

21 60

4. Capital

61

School Condition Improvement • In 2015-16, School Condition Improvement (SCI) funding will increase to

$500 million – double the amount allocated to boards in 2014-15. – Second year of the $1.25 billion investment announced with 2014-15 GSN

• Funding will be allocated in proportion to a board’s total assessed renewal needs under the Condition Assessment Program.

– Renewal needs for buildings to be assessed in 2015 have been estimated based on a building’s weighted age and size. This estimation is only applicable for 2015–16.

• School boards will be required to direct 80 percent of funding to key building components (for example, foundations, roofs, windows) and systems (for example, HVAC and plumbing).

• School boards will be allowed to use the remaining 20 percent of their new SCI funding to address any locally-identified renewal needs.

• Additional details are being released today in memorandum SB:04

23 62

New Pupil Accommodation Review Guideline (PARG) Process • Starting in 2014, the Ministry’s Capital Advisory Committee (CAC) of

school board representatives undertook a comprehensive review of the PARG.

• In late 2014 and early 2015, the Ministry consulted on the CAC’s recommendations with stakeholders from the education and municipal sectors.

• The new PARG is significantly different from the existing (2009) version.

• The PARG continues to represent a framework of minimum standards for school boards to consider in their pupil accommodation review policies.

– School boards are expected to amend their existing policies to reflect the revised PARG before starting any new pupil accommodation reviews.

24 63

New PARG Process (continued)

• The main areas of change in the new PARG include:

– Requirement for school boards to seek feedback from their local municipal governments and other community partners during the pupil accommodation review process.

• Linkage to new Community Planning and Partnerships Guideline.

– Refocused role of the ARC as a conduit for information sharing. • No longer a requirement for ARC to vote on an option.

– ARC membership, at a minimum, to include parent/guardian representatives from the school(s) under review.

– Addition of an optional modified pupil accommodation review process to address local circumstances and provide school boards with greater flexibility.

25 64

Community Planning and Partnerships Guideline • The Facility Partnerships Guideline is renamed the Community Planning and

Partnerships Guideline to support a broader function and objective.

• The revised Guideline now encourages a greater exchange of information between school boards and other government and community organizations.

• Annual meeting and information exchange: – Information regarding capital planning and projections, facility partnership

opportunities, community needs, green space and parkland needs should be exchanged during the annual meeting held by school boards.

• Requirement for boards to seek additional information and input from community partners in specific areas of the board that may be subject to a pupil accommodation review in the near future.

• Linkages: – The Community Planning and Partnerships Guideline is now linked to

functions in the revised Pupil Accommodation Review Guideline.

26 65

Capital Programs Capital Priorities • This program targets school board identified priority capital projects. • Since 2010, the Ministry has allocated over $2.9 billion in capital funding

for the construction of new schools, permanent additions, renovations and school purchases.

• The Ministry will be requesting boards to revise/update their Capital Priorities business cases and submit them later this Spring for Ministry consideration.

School Consolidation Capital (SCC) • As part of the 2014-15 GSN, the Ministry announced a total investment of

$750 million over four years for the new SCC program, intended to help school boards adjust their cost structure in response to reductions in Ministry funding that currently supports empty space.

• The Ministry recently announced $150M in project approvals for 31 projects supported by SCC and new Full-Day Kindergarten funding.

27 66

5. Working Together

67

Working together School Consolidation Experience Studies • The Ministry is conducting pilot studies, working with stakeholders to better

understand their experiences with school closures and consolidations.

• There is comparatively little documented information about how individuals and different groups of people are impacted before, during and after the transition process.

• The studies will provide an opportunity for lessons learned to be shared across the province.

Community Hubs • The government has identified the development of a community hubs policy

as a priority and has appointed Karen Pitre to lead a province-wide discussion.

Consultation • The Ministry will be organizing regional information sessions for school board

officials in Spring 2015 to discuss these changes in detail.

29 68

Resources • The Ministry will be posting the following documents on its website

(http://www.edu.gov.on.ca/eng/policyfunding/funding.html): – B07 memo – Grants for Student Needs Funding for 2015-16 – B08 memo – 2015-16 School Year Education Programs – Other (EPO)

Funding – B09 memo – Release of the New Pupil Accommodation Review

Guideline and Community Planning and Partnerships Guideline – SB04 memo – Update on the School Condition Improvement Funding

Program and the Condition Assessment Program – School Board Funding Projections for the 2015-16 School year – Technical Paper 2015-16 – 2015-16 Education Funding Consultation Summary – 2015-16 Education Funding: A Guide to the Grants for Student Needs

30 69

Questions

[email protected]

THANK YOU

31 70

Ministry of Education Office of the ADM Financial Policy and Business Division 20th Floor, Mowat Block Queen’s Park Toronto ON M7A 1L2

Ministère de l'Éducation Bureau du sous-ministre adjoint Division des politiques financières et des opérations 20e étage, édifice Mowat Queen’s Park Toronto ON M7A 1L2

2015: B07

Memorandum To: Directors of Education Secretary/Treasurers of School Authorities

From: Gabriel F. Sékaly Assistant Deputy Minister Financial Policy and Business Division

Date: March 26, 2015

Subject: Grants for Student Needs Funding for 2015–16

I am writing today to provide you with information about the 2015–16 Grants for Student Needs (GSN). This information is being provided in conjunction with the release of the 2015–16 school year allocations for the Education Programs – Other (EPO) transfer payments and information about revisions to the Pupil Accommodation Review Guideline and the Facility Partnerships Guideline.

NOTICE: Section 234 of the Education Act authorizes the Lieutenant Governor in Council to make regulations governing the making of grants. Such regulations, as they relate to the 2015–2016 fiscal year, have not yet been made. The information set out in this memorandum would come into effect only if such regulations are made that coincide with this memorandum.

The information included in this memorandum is provided for information purposes only and is not binding.

It is anticipated that the grant regulations for the 2015–2016 fiscal year would be entitled: Grants for Student Needs – Legislative Grants for the 2015–2016 School Board Fiscal Year; Calculation of Average Daily Enrolment for the 2015–2016 School Board Fiscal Year; and Calculation of Fees for Pupils for the 2015–2016 School Board Fiscal Year.

The Ministry will advise if such regulations are made.

The 2015–16 GSN funding to school boards is projected to be stable year-over-year while building further efficiencies into the funding model. This will help ensure that our publicly funded education system is fiscally sustainable to realize the province’s renewed goals for education. For the elementary and secondary education sector, sound management of program spending in 2015–16 means keeping the focus on setting priorities and making strategic choices about how best to use resources to improve student achievement.

1

Appendix B

71

A. School Board Efficiencies and Modernization (SBEM) In 2014–15, the Ministry introduced the School Board Efficiencies and Modernization (SBEM) strategy to provide incentives and supports for boards to make more efficient use of school space. The introduction of SBEM established that the goal of promoting more efficient use of school space is an important priority for the government. As many education stakeholders have told the Ministry through the annual GSN consultations, the current approach to managing school space, which diverts significant funding to support underutilized space, is fiscally unsustainable.

Five pillars of SBEM, introduced in 2014–15, demonstrate that the government has heard – and is acting on – the feedback from school boards that supports are required to achieve this transformation. The five pillars are summarized in the following table:

What Stakeholders SBEM Pillars Status Said

Underutilized space is a significant issue

Pillar 1

Revisions to grants to incent boards to make more efficient use of school space

Pillar 1

Further revisions to grants, many of which are being phased in over three years

Pillar 2 Pillar 2

Revisions to the Pupil Accommodation Review Guideline (PARG) to ensure boards have a more effective

Broad consultations conducted and new guideline released

tool to review their facilities, while continuing to ensure constructive public input

Investments needed Pillar 3 Pillar 3 to realize savings over the longer term School Consolidation Capital

(SCC) program funding to support consolidations and right-sizing of school facilities ($750 million over four years beginning in 2014–15)

First round of SCC funding approvals released in March 2015

Pillar 4 Pillar 4 Funding to boards to build planning capacity where there is a need to address underutilized schools ($8.3 million per year)

For 2014–15,a total allocation of $8.3 million was released on February 13, 2015, in 2015: B3 – Capital Planning Capacity Program

2 72

What Stakeholders Said

SBEM Pillars Status

Working together is key

Pillar 5

Continued and meaningful consultation with the education sector on a regular basis on issues related to the GSN, including issues related to making more efficient use of school space

Pillar 5

Education funding consultations with stakeholders in the fall of 2014; summary of consultations now available on Ministry website. PARG consultations conducted in fall/winter of 2014 and early 2015. Ministry will hold regional information sessions on the 2015–16 GSN for school board officials in Spring 2015.

Phasing-In Key Changes to the GSN

Another important message the Ministry heard from school boards is that time is needed to make adjustments to their cost structures and especially to make a more efficient use of school space, which may require the building or renewal of school space in addition to consolidating existing space.

In 2015–16, the Ministry will broaden the SBEM initiative with further measures to encourage the management of underutilized school space, while maintaining support for the schools that need it most, and measures to update and modernize the funding formula. These changes, as a whole, will continue to encourage boards to focus on using education resources and facilities to support students rather than supporting school space that may be surplus to students’ education needs.

These measures will result in changes to (1) Top-up funding and benchmarks under the School Facility Operations and Renewal Grant; (2) the School Foundation Grant; (3) the Geographic Circumstances Grant; and (4) the Declining Enrolment Adjustment.

With the exception of the Declining Enrolment Adjustment, the changes being introduced in 2015–16 will be phased in over three years. This phase in means that, in 2015–16, two-thirds of the funding will be generated by the 2014–15 allocation method and one-third of the funding will be generated by the new allocation method described below. Both of these methods are described in the 2015–16 GSN Technical Paper.

The following table summarizes the projected impact of these changes in 2015–16:

Impact of SBEM changes in 2015–16 $M

1. Top-up funding, benchmarks and reinvestment under the School Facility Operations and Renewal Grant (first year of phase in)

(38.7)

2. School Foundation Grant (first year of phase in) 1.3

3. Geographic Circumstances Grant (first year of phase in) (7.1)

3 73

Impact of SBEM changes in 2015–16 $M

4. Declining Enrolment Adjustment (14.1)

Net Change (58.6)

1. Top-up funding under the School Facility Operations and Renewal Grant (Three-year phase in)

The Ministry will begin to eliminate Base Top-up Funding through the School Facility Operations and Renewal Grant, while continuing to protect Enhanced Top-up funding support for schools that are isolated from other schools of the same board. Some of the savings will be reinvested in operating and renewal cost benchmarks that support students in all schools.

The Ministry will also be updating the board specific adjustment factors that apply to this Grant. The new adjustment factors, as well as investments in operating and renewal cost benchmarks and changes to top-up funding, will be phased in over three years.

Base Top-up funding

Base Top-up funding is currently provided as part of both the School Operations and School Renewal allocations in the School Facility Operations and Renewal Grant. This funding is provided for eligible schools to support the operation and maintenance of facilities where enrolment is less than capacity.

One effect of this funding has been to sustain schools in areas where it would make more sense from a program, fiscal, demographic and geographic perspective to rationalize school space through measures that might include closure or consolidation with nearby facilities and partnerships with coterminous school boards. Starting in 2015–16, the Ministry will begin a complete phase out of Base Top-up funding.

Schools that are eligible for Enhanced Top-up in 2015–16 (under the new criteria described below) will be eligible for top-up to 100 percent of capacity under the new allocation method.

Reinvestment in Benchmarks

As part of the new allocation method, a portion of the savings from the elimination of Base Top-up will be reinvested in the per-pupil operating and renewal cost benchmarks. This reinvestment is intended to redirect funding from underutilized space to serve pupils in all schools across the province.

The benchmark changes are:

• The Benchmark for Operating Costs will increase by $3.23/m2. With an additional increase for utilities (page 12), the benchmark will be $84.38/m2 under the new allocation method. While the increase for utilities will be fully implemented in 2015–16 the $3.23/m2 increase will be phased in.

• The Benchmark for Renewal Costs under the new allocation method will increase by almost 4 percent:

o For schools under 20 years old, the benchmark will increase from $7.59/m2 to $7.89/m2;

4 74

o For schools 20 years old or older, the benchmark will increase from $11.38/m2 to $11.83/m2.

It should be noted that this reinvestment is being phased in over three years. In 2015–16, two-thirds of the funding generated will be based on the 2014–15 allocation method and one-third of the funding generated will be based on the new allocation method.

Enhanced Top-up funding for isolated schools

At the same time, the Ministry recognizes that some school boards require Enhanced Top-up funding support to operate and maintain schools that are isolated from other schools of the same board. To ensure that this funding goes where it is most needed, the Ministry will phase in new criteria to determine eligibility for Enhanced Top-up funding.

Under this approach, any elementary school facility that is at least 10 km away from the next closest school facility (elementary or secondary) of the board will qualify for Enhanced Top-up funding. Any secondary school facility that is at least 20 km away from the next closest secondary school facility of the board will also qualify for Enhanced Top-up funding. (Note that the distance to the closest school is measured by road distance and that the next closest school facility does not include any school facility on the same campus.)

At the same time, the Ministry will begin phasing out the use of some of the current criteria used to determine eligibility for Enhanced Top-up funding. These criteria are: (1) a school facility is part of a “supported” school; or (2) a school facility meets one of two criteria that qualify it as “rural”. These criteria are either that the second character of the school facility's postal code is zero (0), or that the school facility is listed as a rural school in a table in the GSN regulation. All other existing eligibility criteria for Enhanced Top-up remain in place.

Update to School Facility Operations and Renewal Adjustment Factors

In 2015–16, the Ministry will update three of the Grant’s board-specific adjustment factors. This data update reflects changes in school inventory data (school openings, closures, demolitions, additions, and loadings). This dataset was last updated for the 2012-13 GSN.

• Geographic Adjustment Factor (GAF) – This factor, which only applies to the School Renewal Allocation, recognizes differences in construction costs across the province. This updates the board-wide GAF to reflect school openings and closures.

• Age Factor (Over/Under 20 Years of Age) – This factor, which only applies to the School Renewal Allocation, recognizes higher renewal costs for schools that are 20 years or older.

• Supplementary Area Factor (SAF) – This factor, which applies to both the School Operations Allocation and the School Renewal Allocation, recognizes that some boards have schools with a higher per pupil space configuration than the Benchmark Area per Pupil (9.7m2 for elementary and 12.07 m2 for secondary).

Appendix A summarizes the changes to the School Facility Operations and Renewal Grant. Note that this update is being phased in over three years.

2. School Foundation Grant (Three-year phase in) The Ministry has developed a new allocation method for the School Foundation Grant, which provides funding for principals, vice-principals, office support staff, and administrative supplies.

5 75

The overall impact of this new method is a net investment in schools. However, this method will shift funding away from very small schools that are not isolated. At the same time, investments are being made in schools that are larger, remote, or combined (that is, serve both elementary and secondary students.)

Under the new method, there will be three tiers of funding, based on distance, for supported, distant, and regular schools. Included in this new method is an increase in secondary vice-principal support for many schools, which will be scaled at a rate of 1 FTE to 500 ADE, starting once a school is eligible for funding for 1 principal FTE.

As well, all combined schools – whether supported, distant, or regular – will receive funding for one additional full-time equivalent principal at a threshold of at least 350 students (with at least 100 elementary students and at least 100 secondary students), rather than the previous threshold of more than 300 elementary and more than 500 secondary students.

Appendix B summarizes the changes to the School Foundation Grant.

3. Geographic Circumstances Grant including the Supported Schools Allocation (Three-year phase in)

The Geographic Circumstances Grant recognizes the additional costs of operating small schools that are isolated and costs that are associated with the geography of boards, including board size and school dispersion.

Remote and Rural and Rural and Small Community Allocations

In 2015–16, the changes will reflect more up-to-date geographic data, including more current road networks, population data, and updates to the list of urban centres to reflect cities with a population of at least 200,000. The distance factor will now be measured from the board head office, instead of the geographic centre of the board.

As the Ministry has both made investments and put in place protections for boards and schools in rural and remote communities, a decision has been made to phase out the Rural and Small Communities Allocation as part of a balanced overall package of changes.

Supported Schools Allocation

In 2014–15, the Ministry provided additional funding through the Supported Schools Allocation to better support minimum staffing levels where boards make the most use of space by combining both panels in the same school. In 2015–16, additional changes will be made so that elementary and secondary supported schools generate a minimum of one teacher. As well, additional Supported Schools Allocation funding will be eliminated for schools that already generate sufficient funding for teachers (that is, funding for 7.5 or more elementary teachers or 14 or more secondary teachers) through the Pupil Foundation Grant.

4. Declining Enrolment Adjustment (Full implementation in 2015–16) Since 2002–03, the Declining Enrolment Adjustment has provided funding to mitigate the impact on school board revenues when enrolment is declining. School boards have had more than ten years of experience in adjusting their cost structures to enrolment decline. Beginning in 2015–16, the Ministry will be reducing this grant to encourage school boards to adjust more quickly to declining enrolment.

6 76

In 2015–16, boards will receive 50 percent protection for Remote and Rural Allocation and the per-pupil components of the School Board Administration and Governance Grant through the first year component of the Declining Enrolment Adjustment rather than the current 100 percent protection. As well, the second-year component will be reduced from 50 percent to 25 percent of the first year component. The third year of the Declining Enrolment Adjustment, which is currently 5 percent of the first year component, will be eliminated.

B. School Condition Improvement (SCI) Funding In 2015–16, SCI funding will increase to $500 million, or double the amount that was allocated to boards in 2014–15. The 2015–16 funding represents the second year of the $1.25 billion investment that was originally announced in memorandum 2014:B4 – Grants for Student Needs Funding and Regulations for 2014–15, and is intended to help boards address the identified renewal backlog from the data collected to date through the Ministry’s five-year Condition Assessment Program, which began in 2011. A further $500 million in SCI funding will be allocated to boards in 2016-17.

The Ministry is changing the funding approach for SCI starting in 2015–16. SCI funding will now be allocated in proportion to a board’s total assessed renewal needs under the Condition Assessment Program. As the Ministry has not yet assessed all eligible facilities under the Condition Assessment Program, renewal needs for buildings that will be assessed in 2015 have been estimated based on a building’s weighted age and size. This estimation is only applicable for 2015–16.

Beginning in 2015–16, school boards will be required to direct 80 percent of SCI funding to key building components (for example, foundations, roofs, windows) and systems (for example, HVAC and plumbing). School boards will be allowed to use the remaining 20 percent of their new SCI funding to address any locally identified needs.

Additional details on the 2015–16 SCI allocation can be found in the accompanying memorandum SB:04 – Update on the School Condition Improvement Funding Program and the Condition Assessment Program.

C. School Consolidation Experience Studies (SCES) The Ministry is conducting pilot School Consolidation Experience Studies (SCES) as part of an effort to work with administrators, teachers, parents, students, and other members of the school community to better understand stakeholder experiences with pupil accommodation decisions (specifically, school closures and consolidations).

While the Ministry has received feedback over the years about the challenges involved with the pupil accommodation review process – the public consultation process that boards must undertake when making decisions about pupil accommodations – there is comparatively little documented information about how individuals and different groups of people are impacted before, during and after an accommodation decision is made.

The Ministry is aware that many stakeholders are concerned about how a transition to a new, or reorganized school, will impact them. However, while the accommodation review process can be challenging, the outcomes resulting from the decision are often beneficial. For example, the transition resulting from an accommodation review decision can often lead to broader programming opportunities for students, and to boards being better able to focus their resources on the students they serve rather than underutilized space.

7 77

The SCES will provide an opportunity for lessons learned with respect to school closures and consolidations to be shared across the province when the results are released in 2015.

D. Update on Community Hubs As part of the 2015–16 GSN consultations, the Ministry heard that using eligible excess school space as a community resource is an important element in the creation of a strong, vibrant and sustainable education system.

The Ontario government has identified Community Hubs as an important priority for the province. There is great potential for communities to benefit from existing public spaces that could be used for co-ordinated delivery of education, social, and health services.

The government has appointed Karen Pitre as Special Advisor to the Premier on Community Hubs. She will chair an Advisory Group that will conduct consultations, review provincial policies, evaluate existing inventory, and develop a strategic framework to guide the development of an approach, which will include working across sectors and through partnerships, to enhance the use of community assets.

As this work unfolds, and to support Community Hubs, the Ministry is prepared to make funding and other resources available to assist school boards with retrofitting and modifying facilities where a viable community hub partner has been identified. The Ministry will continue to work with education stakeholders and other ministries to support this important initiative.

E. Collective Bargaining under the School Boards Collective Bargaining Act

Most of the collective agreements in the education sector expired August 31, 2014. Negotiations towards new agreements are ongoing. Under the statutory freeze provisions of the Ontario Labour Relations Act, existing terms and conditions of employment, unless specifically time limited in the previous collective agreements, continue into the 2015–16 school year. As in 2014–15, GSN funding for compensation and other labour costs in 2015–16 will reflect the current situation under the statutory freeze. These provisions include the delay in salary grid movement (known as the “97th day” provisions).

When negotiations result in new collective agreements, the Ministry will seek approval of the Lieutenant Governor in Council regarding any necessary amendments to the GSN.

Employer Bargaining Agent Fees for Labour Relations Activities Under the School Boards Collective Bargaining Act (SBCBA), trustees’ associations are the statutory central employer bargaining agents for school boards in central negotiations with teachers’ federations and education worker unions.

In recognition of this role, and beginning in 2015–16, boards will be provided with the funding necessary to support the labour relations activities of their respective trustees’ associations. The funding will be provided each year through the School Board Administration and Governance Grant.

A fees regulation under the SBCBA is planned to be issued that makes the payment of labour relations fees mandatory. The trustees associations will use these fees solely for the purpose of labour relations activities: to pay for costs related to staffing positions for central negotiations, as well as travel and accommodation and other SBCBA-related

8 78

responsibilities, including additional operating expenses, actuarial services, legal services, and translation.

F. Special Education In 2014–15, after extensive consultations with stakeholder representatives, including the Special Education Funding Working Group, the Ministry began the four-year implementation of a new High Needs Amount (HNA) funding method. This change to the HNA Allocation will provide greater fairness and equity, as the new allocation will better reflect the variation among boards with respect to students with special education needs and boards’ abilities to meet those needs.

HNA funding model

In 2015–16, the Ministry will continue to eliminate the legacy HNA per-pupil amounts, which will only be funded at 50 percent. The proportion of funding that is allocated through both the HNA Measures of Variability Amount (MOV) and the Special Education Statistical Prediction Model (SESPM) will increase. In addition, the High Needs Base Amount for Collaboration and Integration will be maintained at $450,000 per board.

To provide stability to school boards and to mitigate projected enrolment declines in 2014–15 and 2015–16, the Ministry will hold the provincial HNA total at $1,050 million during this four-year transition.

Education Programs in Care and/or Treatment, Custody and Correctional Facilities

In 2015–16, the Ministry is inviting school boards to submit applications to address service pressures that have emerged in relation to identified system and local needs, particularly with respect to Francophone students, students who are First Nations, Métis and Inuit (FNMI), students with Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorder (FASD), and students in rural, remote and under-served communities. The types of new programs being sought are Enhanced Education and Treatment (EET) and Community Based Youth Justice (CBYJ) Programs. For further details on these programs, please see the CTCC Program Memo 2015–2016: Application for Approval of Education Programs for Students in Government Approved Care and/or Treatment, Custody and Correctional (CTCC) Facilities (Facilities Amount) on the Financial Accountability and Analysis Branch website.

G. On-going Implementation

School Board Administration Funding

In 2014–15, the Ministry began phasing in a new allocation method for the School Board Administration and Governance Grant, as recommended by the School Board Administration and Governance Advisory Group (BAAG). 2015–16 is the second year of the four-year phase in. The new model will be fully implemented in 2017–18.

Under the new model, three of the Grant’s allocations – the Directors and Supervisory Officers Allocation, the Board Administration Allocation, and the Multiple Municipalities Allocation – will become a single Board Administration Allocation made up of ten core functions. The remaining allocations in the Grant are unaffected.

9 79

http://faab.edu.gov.on.ca/Section_23/English/CTCC-Program-Memo-2015-16-FINAL-Accessible.pdf



http://faab.edu.gov.on.ca/Section%2023.htm

In 2015–16, 50 percent of the funding to boards is being generated using the 2013–14 allocation model, while the remaining 50 percent will be allocated by applying the new model parameters.

Benefits Benchmarks

In 2015–16, the Ministry will continue to implement a reduction in the benefits funding benchmarks as part of the phase-out of retirement gratuities, which began in 2012–13. As in previous years, the phase-out will be implemented through a reduction to all benefits benchmarks in the GSN. This 0.167 percent reduction will be applied to the benefits benchmarks in the Foundation Grants with equivalent adjustments to the benchmarks in the special purpose grants to reflect the reduction in benefits funding.

H. Accountability

Student achievement allocations in the Learning Opportunities Grant

Six allocations in the Learning Opportunities Grant that directly support programs to improve student achievement will be enveloped as a group, starting in 2015–16:

• Literacy and Math Outside the School Day Allocation • Student Success, Grades 7 to 12 Allocation • Grade 7 and 8 Literacy and Numeracy and Student Success Teachers • School Effectiveness Framework Allocation • Ontario Focused Intervention Partnership (OFIP) Tutoring Allocation • Specialist High Skills Major (SHSM) Allocation

Boards will be required to report that they have spent the total funding received from the six allocations on programs and services associated with improving student achievement through these initiatives. The enveloping applies to the sum of the six allocations, not to each allocation separately. It should be noted that this reporting requirement will not replace current program reporting or evaluation requirements specific to any one of the allocations. The Demographic Allocation, which is the largest portion of Learning Opportunities Grant funding, is not affected by these enveloping provisions.

Safe and Accepting Schools Supplement

To ensure that allocations in the Safe and Accepting Schools Supplement continue to be directed to achieving safe, inclusive, and accepting school environments, and to enhance prevention and intervention initiatives, the Ministry will introduce enhanced reporting requirements for the Safe and Accepting Schools Allocation. These requirements will complement the reporting already in place for the Urban and Priority High Schools Allocation.

School Board Administration and Governance

The School Board Administration and Governance Grant enveloping provision incorporated in the GSN requires that board’s net administration and governance expenses in a fiscal year do not exceed the administration and governance limit. The expectation is that school boards are in compliance with the enveloping provision. The Ministry will be reviewing board compliance with this limit.

10 80

FDK and Primary Class Size compliance

School boards are required to organize FDK and primary classes to achieve the requirements set out in Ontario Regulation 132/12 – Class Size. Beginning in 2015–16, the Ministry may take action, including applying GSN cash withholdings, if a board’s FDK or primary class size results are not in compliance with the Class Size regulation for two years in a row beginning with its 2014–15 results.

I. Keeping Up with Costs

Student Transportation

In 2015–16, the Student Transportation Grant will be increased by 2 percent to help boards manage increased costs. As in previous years, this 2 percent cost update will be netted against a school board’s transportation surplus. In addition, funding adjustments due to fuel price changes will continue to be triggered by the fuel escalation and de-escalation mechanism throughout the school year.

Starting in 2015–16, transportation services for residential students at English-language Provincial and Demonstration schools will be delivered by the Ministry’s Provincial Schools Branch.

Starting in 2015–16, the Ministry will work with school boards and transportation consortia to begin collecting and analyzing data through available technology to better understand student transportation delivery in Ontario. Further information will be provided in the near future.

Utilities

In 2015–16, the Ministry will again provide a 2 percent cost benchmark update to the non-staff portion of the School Operations Allocation benchmark to assist boards in managing the increases in commodity prices (natural gas, facility insurance, and other costs). There will also be additional funding to further assist boards with electricity costs. In total, the electricity component of the School Operations Allocation benchmark will increase by 7.3 percent, based on projections from the Ministry of Energy’s most recent Long-Term Energy Plan.

J. School Authorities As in previous years, funding for school authorities will be adjusted in 2015–16, as appropriate, to reflect changes in funding to district school boards. The Ministry will provide further information concerning funding in 2015–16 for school authorities in the near future.

11 81

K. Reporting

Dates for Submission of Financial Reports

The Ministry has established the following dates for submission of financial reports:

Date Description

June 30, 2015 Board Estimates for 2015–16

November 16, 2015

Board Financial Statements for 2014–15

November 20, 2015

Board Enrolment Projections for 2016–17 to 2019–20

December 15, 2015

Board Revised Estimates for 2015–16

May 16, 2016 Board Financial Report for September 1, 2015, to March 31, 2016

The Ministry expects that Estimates forms will be available on EFIS by late April.

L. Working Together The Ministry will be organizing regional information sessions for school board officials in Spring 2015 to provide further information about the 2015–16 GSN. In addition to hearing questions and feedback from school boards, these sessions will also be an opportunity to review current and future challenges. As all effective organizations do, we must continue to look for best practices in managing resources and continue to work collaboratively to develop future strategies for greater efficiency and savings. I am confident that, together, we will successfully sustain Ontario’s achievements in education while contributing to the important goal of a balanced provincial Budget in 2017-18.

M. Information Resources If you require further information about school board funding please contact:

Branch Contact Telephone and E-Mail

Capital funding Grant Osborn (416) 325-1705

[email protected]

Financial accountability and reporting requirements

Marie Li (416) 326-0201

[email protected]

12 82

Branch Contact Telephone and E-Mail

Operating funding Joshua Paul (416) 327-9060

[email protected]

Student Transportation Grant Cheri Hayward (416) 327-7503

[email protected]

Special Education Barry Finlay (416) 325-2889

[email protected]

Sincerely,

Original signed by

Gabriel F. Sékaly Assistant Deputy Minister Financial Policy and Business Division

Copy: Superintendents of Business and Finance Howie Bender, Chief of Staff

13 83

Appendix A: Changes to School Facility Operations and Renewal Grant in 2015–16 2014–15 Allocation Method (Phased out over three years)

Base Top-up Enhanced Top-up Cost Benchmarks Adjustment Factors

• Eligible schools ≤ 65% utilized are provided a top-up rate that recognizes 10% of their excess capacity

• Eligible schools > 65% utilized are provided a top-up rate that recognizes 15% of their excess capacity up to a maximum of 95% utilization

Eligibility:

• Supported Schools: A school facility is part of a “supported” school, which is defined as an elementary school at least 20 km and a secondary school at least 45 km away from the nearest school of the same panel and board

• Rural School: A school facility meets one of two criteria that qualify it as “rural”. These criteria are either that the second character of the school facility's postal code is zero (0), or that the school facility is listed as a rural school in a table in the GSN regulation

• Other eligibility requirements as set out in GSN funding regulations.

Operating Cost:

• $81.15/m2 (includes increase for utilities and electricity)

Benchmark for Renewal Cost:

• For schools under 20 years old, $7.59/m2

• For schools 20 years old or older, $11.38/m2

Adjustment factors announced for 2012-13 GSN in memorandum 2012: B5.

14 84

New Allocation Method (Phased in over three years)

Base Top-up Enhanced Top-up Cost Benchmarks Adjustment Factors

Base top-up is eliminated Eligibility:

• Elementary: Eligible if the next closest elementary or secondary facility of the board is 10km apart or greater

• Secondary: Eligible if the next closest secondary facility of the board is 20km apart or greater

• As before, new schools and schools that have undergone major retrofits or additions are not eligible for Top-up funding for a five-year period

• No change to other eligibility requirements as set out in GSN funding regulations.

Benchmark for Operating Cost (see details on page 5 - also includes increase for utilities and electricity):

• $84.38/m2

Benchmark for Renewal Cost:

• For schools under 20 years old, $7.89/m2

• For schools 20 years old or older, $11.83/m2

Revised adjustment factors to reflect school board data as of September 2, 2014

15 85

Appendix B: Changes to School Foundation Grant in 2015–16 2014–15 Allocation Method (Phased out over three years)

Category Principals FTE Vice-Principals FTE Office Support FTE All Schools Elementary / Secondary:

• 0.5 for less than 50 ADE • 1 for 50 or more ADE • Additional principal if a

combined school more than 300 elementary ADE and more than 500 secondary ADE

Elementary: • Scaled starting at 250 ADE Secondary: • Scaled starting at 100 ADE

Elementary / Secondary: • 1 base FTE • Additional scaled starting at

100 ADE

New Allocation Method (Phased in over three years)

Category Principals FTE Vice-Principals FTE Office Support FTE Regular Elementary:

• Scaled from 0 to 1 between 0 Elementary: • Scaled starting at 250 ADE

Elementary / Secondary: • Scaled from 0 to 1 FTE

and 150 ADE between 0 and 100 ADE • 1 principal for 150+ ADE • Additional scaled at starting at Secondary: • Scaled from 0 to 1 between 0

and 200 ADE • 1 principal for 200+ ADE

Secondary: • 0 for less than 200 ADE, then

scaled starting at 0.4 for 200 ADE, 1 VP at 500 ADE

100 ADE

• Additional principal if a combined school of at least 350 ADE, including at least 100 elementary ADE and at least 100 secondary ADE

16 86

Category Principals FTE Vice-Principals FTE Office Support FTE Distant Elementary / Secondary: Elementary: Elementary / Secondary: (10km+

elementary /

20km+ secondary)

• Scaled from 0 to 1 between 0 and 100 ADE

• 1 principal for 100+ ADE • Additional principal if a

combined school of at least 350 ADE, including at least 100

• Scaled starting at 250 ADE Secondary: • 0 for less than 100 ADE, then

scaled starting at 0.2 for 100 ADE, 1 VP at 500 ADE

• Scaled from 0 to 1 FTE between 0 and 100 ADE

• Additional scaled at starting at 100 ADE

elementary ADE and at least 100 secondary ADE

Supported (20km+

elementary /

45km+ secondary)

Elementary / Secondary: • 0.5 for less than 50 ADE • 1 for 50 or more ADE • Additional principal if a

combined school of at least 350 ADE, including at least 100 elementary ADE and at least

Elementary: • Scaled starting at 250 ADE Secondary: • 0 for less than 50 ADE, scaled

starting at 0.1 for 50 ADE, 1 VP at 500 ADE

Elementary / Secondary: • 1 base FTE • Additional scaled starting at

100 ADE

100 secondary ADE

17 87

2015-16 School Year Education Programs – Other (EPO) Funding Page 1 of 18 Memorandum B8

Ministry of Education Mowat Block Queen’s Park Toronto ON M7A 1L2

Ministère de l'Éducation Édifice Mowat Queen’s Park Toronto ON M7A 1L2

2015:B8 MEMORANDUM TO: Directors of Education Secretary/Treasurers of School Authorities FROM: Grant Clarke, ADM

Learning and Curriculum Division

Mary Jean Gallagher, ADM Student Achievement Division

Jim Grieve, ADM Early Years Division Janine Griffore, ADM French-Language, Aboriginal Learning and Research

John Malloy, ADM

Leadership and Learning Environment Division Gabriel F. Sékaly, ADM Financial Policy and Business Division

Pamela Skinner, CAO and ADM

Corporate Management and Services Division DATE: March 26, 2015 SUBJECT: 2015-16 School Year Education Programs – Other (EPO)

Funding The Ministry of Education is pleased to announce its 2015-16 projected EPO funding at the same time as the release of Grants for Student Needs (GSN) funding. Improvement Highlights Context The core of Ontario’s education success is its focus on a consistent vision for the system, with the goals of that vision being widely known and embraced by all partners.

Appendix C

88


Achieving Excellence: A Renewed Vision for Education in Ontario, outlines four key goals for our education system: achieving excellence in teaching and learning, ensuring equity, promoting well-being, and enhancing confidence in a publicly funded education system. Our renewed vision challenges us all to transform to meet the expectations of today and build the vibrant, prosperous province of tomorrow. At the same time, making the most efficient use of resources will ensure our system is sustainable and responsible. This year’s Education Program – Other funding (EPO) is allocated to support our core goals and priorities identified in the renewed vision. Transforming the education system and realizing our shared goals for Achieving Excellence while living within our means requires commitment and determination, as well as finding creative ways to implement effectively and for the maximum benefit of our learners. EPO Streamlining Project & Theme Bundling Concept As indicated in the previous EPO B memorandums (2014:B5 and 2014:B10), the ministry has initiated the EPO streamlining project to simplify the reporting processes and requirements for EPO transfer payments. The goals of the streamlining project are to reduce administrative burden, improve financial resource management and better support the renewed vision. The EPO streamlining project will be phased in over multiple years. Starting in the 2015-16 school year (SY), new approaches will be adopted to allow flexibility for school boards in how they allocate funding resources, and improve reporting processes for detailed financial reporting and non-financial program reporting. The main concept that will be used to achieve the project goals is theme bundling. Selected EPO programs that serve the same strategy/priority will be grouped into a bundle, within which school boards will be allowed to flexibly manage the funding resources, as long as they are able to deliver the same (or better) outcomes that the ministry requires in a cost-efficient way. The ministry will also streamline the reporting requirements for bundled programs through re-designed and/or consolidated report backs. The first wave (to be launched in 2015-16SY) will see the implementation of the following three pilot bundles:

1) Student Success – Building Capacity for Effective and Differentiated Instruction 2) Well Being: Safe, Accepting and Healthy Schools and Mental Health 3) Ontario Leadership Strategy and Professional Learning Enhancements

In addition to the three bundles, district school boards (DSBs) are expected to continuously pursue program objectives and meet reporting requirements outlined in the TP agreements and initiative memoranda. DSBs will be provided opportunities to identify additional bundling ideas that allow better coordination and integration of work

89


across EPO funded programs in order to innovatively respond to locally identified improvement needs. Funding Allocations To facilitate school boards’ budget planning for the 2015-16 school year, we confirm that $214.1 million of EPO funding will be allocated to school boards and school authorities to support ministry priorities. Within this amount: • $153.4 million is allocated by program, with school board allocation detailed

included in this memorandum; and • $60.7 million has been allocated by program, with school board allocations to be

confirmed later in the year.

90


Initiative ($M) Allocated To be Allocated Grand TotalAboriginal Education - First Nation, Métis and Inuit Education PolicyFramework Implementation 4.7 4.7Autism Supports and Training 3.0 3.0Collaborative Inquiry for Learning – Mathematics 4.9 4.9Community Use of Schools - Outreach Coordinators 6.4 6.4Community Use of Schools - Priority Schools 7.5 7.5Early Years Leads 8.9 8.9Engagement/Re-engagement – First Nation, Métis and Inuit Students 0.5 0.5Enrolment Reporting Initiative 2.0 2.0Equity and Inclusive Education - Parent Engagement 0.9 0.9Focus on Youth 7.0 7.0French Language Literacy 0.5 0.5French Language Student and School Support 0.2 0.7 0.9K-12 System Implementation and Monitoring (SIM) - Regional Network Sessions 1.8 1.8Learning for All K-12 Regional Projects 1.5 1.5Library Staff 9.8 9.8MISA Local Capacity 3.2 3.2MISA Network Centres 1.6 1.6New Policy Development 0.8 0.8Ontario Leadership Strategy and Professional Learning Enhancements 4.8 4.8Outdoor Education and Engagement 20.0 20.0Politique d’aménagement linguistique (PAL) 0.4 0.4Professional Learning Communities (PLC) to Support the Development of French Language 0.6 0.6Provincial Math Support Strategy, Grades 7 to 10 1.2 1.2Re-engagement (12 & 12+) 1.2 1.2School Mental Health ASSIST (SMH ASSIST) 1.0 1.0Small and Northern Boards Mathematics 4.4 4.4Specialist High Skills Majors (SHSM) 6.6 6.6Student Engagement 1.2 1.2Student Success – Building Capacity for Effective and Differentiated Instruction 6.8 6.8Student Success - Building Innovative Practice 0.5 0.4 0.9Student Success – Middle Years Collaborative Inquiry, Grades 7–10 Mathematics 0.5 0.5Student Success – Ontario Public Service (OPS) Learn and Work Program 0.4 0.4Student Success School and Cross Panel Teams - Supporting Transitions and Innovative Practices 1.6 1.6Student Success School Support Initiative 4.5 4.5Student Success School Support Initiative - First Nations Métis and Inuit (FNMI) 0.6 0.6Student Work Study 12.7 12.7Supporting Implementation of Full-Day Kindergarten 0.5 0.5Supporting Implementation of Policies and Programs 0.3 0.3System Implementation and Monitoring (SIM)/Ontario Focused Intervention Partnership (OFIP) Support 16.5 6.2 22.7Teacher Learning and Leadership Program (TLLP) 3.5 3.5Technology and Learning Fund 36.5 36.5Technology Enabled Learning and Teaching Contact 6.4 6.4Technology Enabled Learning and Teaching Contact in French-language School Boards 1.3 1.3Tutors in the Classroom 1.2 1.2Well Being: Safe Accepting and Healthy Schools and Mental Health 6.4 6.4Grand Total 153.4 60.7 214.1* Numbers may not add up due to rounding.

91


SECTION 1. PROGRAM ALLOCATIONS WITH SCHOOL BOARD DETAIL [See Appendix A for details] Program funding of $153.4 million has been allocated board by board.

Autism Supports and Training ($3.0M) All boards will continue to receive funding to support training on Applied Behaviour Analysis (ABA) instructional methods, with increasing skill development to implement ABA instructional methods in the classroom, targeting school based teams, including teachers and other educators working with students with Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD).

Collaborative Inquiry for Learning – Mathematics (CIL-M) ($4.9M) Collaborative Inquiry for Learning – Mathematics (CIL-M) in every region of the province is:

• building knowledge about mathematics instruction to improve student learning and achievement

• implementing capacity building strategies to enable sustainable learning communities that involve participants representing various roles within the school board

• supporting principals’ mathematics instructional leadership through participation in the CIL-M network

• providing a professional learning framework that supports the spread of collaborative inquiry across the entire district school board

Community Use of Schools – Outreach Coordinators ($6.4M) Funding is allocated to enable school boards to hire Outreach Coordinators who help ensure the effectiveness of the Community Use of Schools program at the local level through activities such as program coordination, outreach, information sharing, and data collection. The Community Use of Schools program helps all schools offer affordable access to indoor and outdoor school space to not-for-profit groups outside of school hours. Community Use of Schools – Priority Schools ($7.5M) The Priority Schools Initiative, a component of the Community Use of Schools program, helps a set of schools provide not-for-profit groups free after-hours access to school space in communities that need it most.

92


Early Years Leads Program ($8.9M) Funding is allocated to school boards to continue to support a minimum of a 0.5 FTE Early Years Lead position (EY Lead), funded at the Supervisory Officer level. The primary objectives of this position include:

• Leadership of system-wide implementation of the vision of creating a system of responsive, high quality, accessible, and increasingly integrated early years programs and services that contribute to healthy child development as outlined in the Ontario Early Years Policy Framework.

• Development of policies, protocols, programs, standards, and strategies as required to ensure consistently high quality early years programs and services.

• Coordination of a system plan to strengthen integration of full-day kindergarten, child care, and early years programs and services in each school community.

• Advance knowledge building in the early years community by contributing to the development, review, administration and application of performance measures and indicators.

In the 2015-16 school year, an allocation of $8.4 million will be provided for ongoing EY Lead positions and one-time funding of $0.5 million for professional development/ release time for educators. Focus on Youth Summer Program ($7.0M) Funding for this program continues in 2015-16 to support the partnership between select school boards and local community agencies to provide summer programming and employment opportunities for students in urban, high-needs neighbourhoods. K-12 System Implementation and Monitoring (SIM) – Regional Network Sessions ($1.8M) Each DSB receives funding to support the work of a system improvement team composed of school and central board representatives. The team participates in regional network sessions and supports the implementation of effective teaching, learning and leading practices in mathematics in elementary and secondary schools. Funding of $25,000 per board for the SIM team is allocated in this memorandum. Learning for All K-12 Regional Projects ($1.5M) The ministry will provide school boards with funds to continue mobilizing knowledge and sustain professional learning pertaining to the implementation of resource guide Learning for All, K-12 (2013). This funding will continue to support regional professional learning and school board projects through collaborative inquiries that explore the following areas of focus:

93


• “knowing your student” and “students knowing themselves as learners” through an asset lens and with a growth mindset;

• deep understanding of student growth and learning and inclusive practice; • critical thinking and evidence-based decision making in responsive, personalized

and precise learning and teaching; and • collaboration and shared professional learning in a tiered approach to support

student growth and learning. Library Staff Investment Project ($9.8M) Funding continues for library staff (teacher-librarians and/or library technicians) within elementary schools. Board allocations have been revised for the 2015-16 school year. Managing Information for Student Achievement (MISA) Local Capacity and Network Centres ($4.8M) MISA has enabled boards to increase the capacity of teachers, principals, and board administrators to utilize information in support of improved student outcomes. Building on the success of this initiative, the ministry will provide $3.2M in direct funding to further assist with MISA Local Capacity Building efforts and $1.6M to the seven MISA Professional Network Centres (PNCs) established in 2005. Politique d’aménagement linguistique (PAL) initiatives ($0.4M) In 2014, the French-Language Policy and Programs Branch (FLEPPB) carried out an extensive consultation exercise regarding the PAL, which was published in 2004. The consultation pointed to a need for a new strategic plan for the policy’s implementation. Funding of $0.2 million will be provided to boards to support the local implementation of a new strategic plan once it has been developed. Board-by-board allocations will be made available later in the year. In addition, four province-wide cultural activities for students will take place in 2015-2016. Investments for these activities total $0.125 million.

Professional Learning Communities (PLC) to support the development of French language ($0.6M) In 2015-16, French-language school boards will receive funding to support the implementation of collaborative inquiries connected to the school and board improvement plans, as well as the School Effectiveness Framework K-12. The funding is intended for release-time, travel and logistical costs for the PLC meetings at the local level. The objective of the funding is to improve student success in reading, writing and oral communication, from kindergarten to grade 12, as well as reducing gaps between boys and girls in these areas. The focus of the professional learning communities may vary according to the needs of schools and school boards, but it could address oral

94


communication for young children (i.e. COPE project, Communication orale de la petite enfance), Actualisation linguistique en français (ALF) and boys’ literacy. Provincial Math Support Strategy, Grades 7 to 10 ($1.2M) In 2015-2016, French-language school boards will continue to receive funding to implement the Provincial Math Support Strategy, Grades 7 to 10. The allocated funding will be used to hire a qualified math teacher/coach to act as grade 7-12 Numeracy lead at the board level. This funding supports the objective of building the board capacity to improve math teaching and learning. School Mental Health ASSIST (SMH ASSIST) ($1.0M) Funding will continue for SMH ASSIST that is part of the Ministry of Education’s commitment to Ontario’s Comprehensive Mental Health and Addictions Strategy. SMH ASSIST is a provincial implementation support team designed to help all 72 school boards as they work to promote student mental health and well-being. SMH ASSIST is focused on building organizational conditions for effective school mental health; enhancing educator capacity in the area of student mental health; and implementing evidence-based mental health promotion and prevention programming in schools. Small and Northern Boards Mathematics ($4.4M) This initiative is designed to enable school boards in the north, as well as small school boards facing achievement challenges in math across the province, to develop expertise among staff and additional local capacity in the area of elementary mathematics. Funding supports a math facilitator position and provides for release time in each of the designated boards, as well as opportunities for professional learning in the area of numeracy. Student Success – Building Capacity for Effective and Differentiated Instruction ($6.8M) [Theme Bundle #1] All English-language school boards will receive funding to support four educator capacity building strategies, each of which includes a focus on effective and differentiated instruction and collaborative inquiry as part of a range of professional learning formats. The goal of these initiatives is to support the learning and engagement of students not yet achieving success. Boards will allocate the funds to provide multi-level educator capacity building in each of four areas: literacy, mathematics, differentiated instruction and collaborative inquiry.

• Student Success - Building Capacity for Effective Instruction in Literacy ($1.7 M) • Student Success - Building Capacity for Effective Instruction in Mathematics

($1.7M) • Student Success - Capacity Building for Differentiated Instruction ($1.7 M) • Student Success - Collaborative Inquiry for Instructional Impact ($1.7 M)

95


Student Success – Building Innovative Practice, Grades 7-10 ($0.9M) Selected school boards will receive funding to support case study sites for innovative practice to meet the needs of students not yet achieving success. Cross-panel capacity building to improve student learning and reduce gaps in student achievement will emphasize:

• Connecting teaching and learning by responding to student learning and engagement needs using a differentiated approach to instruction that is based on assessment information including student feedback/voice

• Multi-level learning (classroom, school and board) using a collaborative inquiry model

• Knowledge mobilization through the collaborative (ministry and board) development of professional learning resources (e.g., video/print) that capture and extend the learning from the project

Student Success – Middle Years Collaborative Inquiry, Grades 7-10 Mathematics ($0.5M) Selected school boards will continue to receive funding to support a cross-panel inquiry project to generate knowledge about and evidence of effective practices in middle years classrooms. The investment supports boards in developing:

• cross-panel instructional capacity to improve student learning and reduce gaps in student achievement in mathematics as reflected in the Board Improvement Plan for Student Achievement (BIPSA)

• capacity in collaborative inquiry skills and connections among middle years educators to improve mathematics learning for all students from grades 7 to 10

• develop a model to share practices with others in order to build capacity across schools/boards and the province

The inquiry project will be guided by one or more of the Seven Foundational Principles outlined in “Paying Attention to Mathematics Education” (Fall, 2011). Student Success School and Cross Panel Teams – Supporting Transitions and Innovative Practices ($1.6M) All English-language boards will receive funds to support Student Success School and Cross-Panel teams. The funds will be used to:

• Support the Transitions and Pathways Collaborative Inquiry and cross-panel work to address the needs of students with persistent challenges as they move from grade to grade and school to school.

• Track and monitor individual student progress through to the completion of diploma requirements, in particular those students who may be at risk of becoming ‘early leavers’.

96


• Provide timely supports, education and career planning, and interventions to assist students in completing their academic and non-academic graduation requirements.

• Provide ongoing professional learning for Student Success School and Cross-Panel Teams.

Student Work Study ($12.8M) Funding is allocated to support collaborative teacher inquiry into student learning needs and the precise assessment and instructional strategies that close learning gaps and improve achievement. Supporting Implementation of Full-Day Kindergarten ($0.5M) In 2015-16, French-language school boards will receive an allowance for the implementation of the revised program. School boards will receive base funding in order to implement the program effectively in addition to a per class allowance. The funding will help school boards to build capacity, to promote the integration of learning expectations from four frames (Appartenance et contribution, Autorégulation et bien-être, Manifestation des apprentissages en littératie et en numératie et Résolution de problèmes et innovation), to make children’s voices evident in the environment and make visible their learning, thinking and theories (Assessment for Learning and as Learning) and to continue to support play-based and inquiry-based learning in the kindergarten classes. Supporting Implementation of Policies and Programs ($0.3M) This funding supports school boards to provide the necessary training and support for the implementation of policies such as Growing Success and of new curriculum policy documents, such as Health and Physical Education. The objective is to strengthen the instruction underlying these policies and programs: assessment as, for and of learning and inquiry-based learning. System Implementation and Monitoring (SIM)/Ontario Focused Intervention Partnership (OFIP) Support ($22.7M) - $16.5M allocated by board in this memo, $6.2M to be allocated by board in the future. SIM/OFIP funding is allocated in two stages: First, each DSB will generate $2,200 per elementary school as a base amount of System Implementation and Monitoring (SIM) funding. Additionally, each school that meets the SIM funding criteria, based on 2013-14 student achievement results, will generate a further $4,500 in funding. This funding is to support professional learning in elementary schools focused on improving student achievement results, with a particular focus on literacy and numeracy outcomes. This funding is allocated in this memo.

97


Second, additional funding will be allocated to eligible boards in the fall 2015 based on EQAO’s 2014-15 student achievement results to support professional learning in lower performing elementary schools focused on improving student achievement results, also with a particular focus on literacy and numeracy outcomes. Technology and Learning Fund ($36.5M) Funding related to the Technology and Learning Funds (TLF) supports Ontario’s renewed vision to transform and modernize education by investing in deeper learning practices enabled by technology. Actual funding, board accountability, research and reporting requirements with respect to TLF allocations and regional supports will be later communicated to District School Boards, School Authority Boards and the Provincial Schools Branch by the Council of Ontario Directors of Education (CODE) as co-sponsor with the ministry for this initiative. Technology Enabled Learning and Teaching Contact ($6.4M) Funding continues for one position (formerly the e-Learning Contact) per district school board for the 2015-16 school year to support technology enabled learning and teaching in Ontario. The position will lead boards in the implementation and integration of content, pedagogy and technology for learning and teaching in the 21st century. Technology Enabled Learning and Teaching Contact in French-language School Boards ($1.3M) Each French-language school board will continue to receive funding for a French-language Technology Enabled Learning and Teaching Contact position.In its role, the ”Personne responsable de l’environnement d’apprentissage virtuel” (PREAV), will lead boards in the implementation and integration of content, pedagogy and technology for learning and teaching in the 21st century. Well Being: Safe Accepting and Healthy Schools and Mental Health ($6.4M) [Theme Bundle #2] This allocation combines prior years’ funding for safe and accepting schools and implementation of board mental health strategies in support of Ontario’s comprehensive mental health and addiction strategy. In prior years two separate funding allocations were provided. These allocations have been bundled together to allow boards flexibility for better alignment of initiatives. Boards are allowed to flexibly manage funds within the same bundle, as long as they are able to deliver the same (or better) outcomes that the ministry requires in a cost-efficient way. It also reduces administrative burden on boards as only one Transfer Payment Agreement and one report back required. The purpose of this funding is to support school boards’ work around the ministry’s goal of promoting well-being. This funding can be used to support:

98


• continued development and implementation of school board mental health and addictions three year strategies and action plans;

• taking further steps to implementing a whole school approach to promoting safe, inclusive and accepting schools (including working with Equity and Inclusive Education (EIE) Networks); and

• supporting strategies and activities that are aligned with the Foundations for a Healthy School resource.

99


SECTION 2. PROGRAM ALLOCATIONS

Funding of $60.7 million, as outlined below, has been allocated by program, with board-by-board allocations to be confirmed later in the year. Aboriginal Education - First Nation, Métis and Inuit Education Policy Framework Implementation ($4.7M) The ministry’s investment in Aboriginal education outside of the GSN will provide continued support for the implementation of the Ontario First Nation, Métis and Inuit Education Policy Framework to enhance the success and well-being of Aboriginal students and to help close achievement gaps. Specifically, this investment will support boards to implement 2015-16 strategies and actions identified for school boards in the recently released Ontario First Nation, Métis and Inuit Education Policy Framework Implementation Plan. Engagement/Re-engagement – First Nation, Métis and Inuit Students ($0.5M) Funding will be allocated to selected English-language school boards in 2015-16 to provide support as they contact, mentor and monitor any self-identified First Nation, Métis and Inuit students in grade 9-12 who have left school. Boards will provide the ministry with:

• the number of students who were contacted; • the number of students who returned; • the number of students who met the literacy and community involvement

graduation requirements; • the number of students who graduated; and, • the number of credits obtained.

Enrolment Reporting Initiative ($2.0M) This funding of $2.0 million in 2015-16 is to support school board implementation of phase 2 of the Enrolment Reporting Initiative. This initiative was announced on November 1, 2013 to replace paper-based enrolment registers for continuing education and other programs with other electronic student management systems and Ontario School Information System (OnSIS) data collection. Equity and Inclusive Education - Parent Engagement ($0.9M) Funding is provided to support seven school board-led Equity and Inclusive Education (EIE) Implementation Networks (six regional English-language networks and one provincial French-language network). A total of $875,000 is provided for the networks to support the effective implementation of Ontario’s Equity and Inclusive Education

100


Strategy, Parent Engagement policy, character development initiatives, and to share promising practices in schools and boards across the province. French Language Literacy ($0.5M) This funding will support opportunities for school leaders and teaching staff to improve achievement and well-being of French-language learners and newcomer students in French-language schools. It will also identify and fund targeted initiatives based on evidence gathered throughout the implementation of the plan and the assessment of practices as per Ontario’s First Nation, Métis, and Inuit Education Policy Framework. French-language School and Student Support ($0.9M) Targeted French-language school boards will receive funding to support the capacities of leaders and teaching staff in grade 7-12 schools. The funding will be used to plan evidence-based projects that are intended to ensure the long-term success and well-being of students. Initiatives such as Differentiated Instruction that build capacity through professional learning projects or the Re-engagement Initiative (12&12+) are some examples of projects that will continue to be funded. $0.2 million in funding has been allocated per board in Appendix A. Detailed allocations for the rest of the funding will be provided at a later date. New Policy Development ($0.8M) The ministry anticipates introduction of a new kindergarten to grade 12 policy on experiential learning including cooperative education and furthering support for implementing Creating Pathways to Success: An Education and Career/Life Planning Program for Ontario Schools, Policy and Program Requirements, Kindergarten to Grade 12. Ontario Leadership Strategy and Professional Learning Enhancements ($4.8M) [Theme Bundle #3] Achieving Excellence: A Renewed Vision for Education in Ontario reconfirmed that leadership is a critical lever to ensure attainment of the renewed goals. In support of Achieving Excellence and in consultation with school districts, the ministry has developed a renewed Ontario Leadership Strategy (OLS) – Leadership for Learning. The renewed vision of Leadership for Learning is reflected in the Board Leadership Development Strategy (BLDS) for 2015-16. School boards will continue to be provided with funding to support succession planning and capacity building; evidence and research; the continued development of effective leadership practices and personal leadership resources through mentoring and coaching; and a growth-oriented culture of continuous improvement. The BLDS continues to support the goals of school and board improvement plans for student achievement and the board multi-year plan.

101


The Professional Learning Enhancements (PLE) fund provides school boards with a funded opportunity to improve the quality of supports and professional learning opportunities available to teachers. The renewed vision demonstrates a commitment to authentic, collaborative, continuous learning for all our learners. Powerful learning designs like mentorship de-privatize instruction, foster collaboration, and support educator leadership via the intentional sharing of knowledge and practice between colleagues. School boards are best positioned to offer a continuum of mentorship based on the authentic learning needs of the mentors they support. School boards will be given the opportunity to combine BLDS and PLE to provide support along a continuum of mentorship roles that could include: associate teachers, NTIP mentors, VP/P mentors, ECE mentors, business and facilities mentors and board consultants and coordinators. Outdoor Education and Engagement ($20.0M) This funding will be used to support outdoor learning activities for elementary and secondary students. These activities may be provided by school boards or by third party organizations, such as not-for-profit or community groups. In 2015-16, this funding is for expenses associated with student learning activities in the outdoors. For example:

• fees related to participation in outdoor learning activities provided by school boards or by third party organizations, such as not-for-profit or community groups

• to enlist the expertise and/or facilities/resources of community agencies in outdoor learning activities

• transportation costs • teacher release time

In 2015-16, this allocated funding may not be used for:

• staffing • costs associated with board outdoor education facilities, e.g., repairs, equipment • the purchase or development of learning resources

Re-engagement (12 & 12+) ($1.2M) Funding will be allocated to all English-language school boards in 2015-16 to provide support as they contact, mentor and monitor students who, despite being close to graduation, have left school. Boards will provide the ministry with:

• the number of students who were contacted; • the number of students who returned; • the number of students who met the literacy and community involvement

graduation requirements; • the number of students who graduated; and, • the number of credits obtained.

102


Specialist High Skills Major (SHSM) ($6.6M) Funding for Specialist High Skills Major programs is provided to school boards both through the GSN (approximately 75% of the total funding) and through an EPO transfer payment (25% of the total funding). The funding allocation to a board may change if student enrolment or program offerings differ from the approved programs resulting from the board’s 2015-16 SHSM application. These funds are to be used by school boards to address costs related to the delivery of SHSM programs in the following expenditure categories:

• certification and training programs for SHSM students • tracking students completion of the SHSM components • equipment purchases and consumable expenditures • development/renewal of connections with local business and community partners • teacher professional development.

Student Engagement ($1.2M) The Student Voice Initiative is designed to strengthen student engagement and achievement. The initiative helps schools, school boards, and the ministry learn more about how students learn and what helps them engage in their learning environments through the Minister’s Student Advisory Council, Regional Student Forums, and Students as Researchers and SpeakUp Projects. All school boards are invited to encourage students from grades 7 to 12, and in particular, students not yet achieving success, to apply for funds to lead SpeakUp Projects. An allocation of $1.15M will be provided to fund approved English- and French-language projects in 2015-16. Student Success – Ontario Public Service (OPS) Learn and Work Program ($0.4M) Selected school boards will receive funding to support the delivery of the Ontario Public Service (OPS) Learn and Work Program, a specialized co-operative education program that re-engages youth aged 16 to 20 from priority communities. The OPS Learn and Work program provides students the opportunity to earn credits towards their high school diploma and paid work experience in the OPS and/or its related agencies. Student Success – School Support Initiative (SSI) ($4.5M) Selected English-language school boards will receive funding to support capacity building in secondary schools where pass rates in grade 9 and 10 Applied courses are below the provincial rate. The School Support Initiative is a closing the gap strategy which focuses on improving student achievement, increasing pass rates and credit accumulation.

103


The funding is to support the implementation and monitoring of the SSI, to build the capacity of the principal as the instructional leader and for job-embedded professional learning for teachers. Student Success School Support Initiative – First Nation, Métis and Inuit Students ($0.6M) Additional funding will be provided to select school boards in the SSI where data indicates that self-identified First Nations, Metis and Inuit learners in grade 9 and 10 Applied courses are at risk of not meeting graduation requirements due to credit loss. Teacher Learning and Leadership Program (TLLP) ($3.5M) This program is aimed at experienced teachers and involves self-directed learning and sharing based on ministry, board or school priorities. It enhances opportunities for experienced teachers to expand their knowledge and leadership skills, and share exemplary practices with others. Since the program began approximately 800 projects, involving the work of over 4,200 teachers, have been approved for funding. Tutors in the Classroom ($1.2M) With this funding, boards are able to hire and train postsecondary students to tutor elementary students. The tutors support the work of classroom teachers by working with students to reinforce skills and concepts. Funding is accessed by board application and will be finalized later in the year.

104

Ministry of Education

Capital Policy and Programs Branch 19th Floor, Mowat Block Queen’s Park Toronto ON M7A 1L2

Ministère de l'Éducation

Direction des politiques et des programmes d’immobilisations 19e étage, édifice Mowat Queen’s Park Toronto ON M7A 1L2

2015: SB04

Memorandum To: Senior Business Officials Superintendents of Facilities

From: Grant Osborn Director Capital Policy and Programs Branch


Subject: Update on the School Condition Improvement Funding Program and the Condition Assessment Program

This memorandum is intended to provide boards with additional information about the changes to the School Condition Improvement (SCI) funding program and reporting for 2015-16 that were announced today in memorandum 2015:B07 Grants for Student Needs Funding for 2015–16. As well, this memorandum provides an update on the status of the Ministry’s Condition Assessment Program.

Highlights: 1. School Condition Improvement (SCI) Program Total SCI funding for 2015-16 will be $500 million. SCI funding allocation has been revised to align primarily with renewal needs

identified through the Condition Assessment Program. Eighty percent (80%) of a board’s allocation must target key building components

and systems, with the remaining 20% addressing other locally identified needs. Boards must report SCI expenditures in TCPS/VFA.facility. Cash flow payments for SCI will be made twice a year, based on the lesser of the

amount reported in TCPS/VFA.facility and in EFIS.

2. Condition Assessment Program 2015 represents the final year of the original assessment cycle. The Ministry plans to begin a new five-year assessment cycle in 2016. VFA will be working with all boards over the next year to migrate from TCPS to

the VFA.facility asset management software

3. Remaining Service Life Boards are reminded to update the remaining service life of their assets.

1

Appendix D

107

1. School Condition Improvement (SCI) Program

New Funding Methodology

In 2015-16, SCI funding will increase to $500 million, double the amount that was allocated to boards in 2014-15. Please see Appendix A for individual school board allocations for 2015-16. A further $500 million in SCI funding will be allocated to boards in 2016-17. Please note that the allocation for 2016-17 will differ from the 2015-16 allocation.

In large part, the Ministry was able to obtain additional SCI funding because of the data collected about school condition and renewal needs through the Ministry’s Condition Assessment Program. Now that most of the schools in the province have been assessed, the Ministry would like to ensure that SCI funding is allocated in a manner that best supports the identified five-year renewal needs of schools and keeps schools in a good state of repair. Therefore, the Ministry is changing the SCI funding methodology, starting in 2015-16.

SCI funding will now be allocated in proportion to a board’s total assessed renewal needs under the Ministry’s Condition Assessment Program. As the Ministry has not yet assessed all eligible facilities under the Condition Assessment Program, renewal needs for buildings not yet assessed have been estimated. Based on data from assessed facilities to date, the Ministry has noted a general relationship between age and condition of facilities. The Ministry has used this information and the weighted age and size (on-the-ground capacity and gross floor area) of the unassessed facilities to estimate outstanding renewal needs. This estimation is only applicable for 2015-16.

Renewal needs for school facilities that are five years of age or under or are not assets of the board (i.e. short-term leases) have not been considered. To adequately recognize renewal needs in a facility jointly owned between two school boards, assessment data for that facility has been split between the two boards in proportion to each board’s percentage of the buildings total gross floor area.

Under this revised methodology, the Ministry will also ensure that most of the SCI funding is targeted towards identified major renewal needs, while still providing boards with the flexibility to direct some SCI funding to address other locally-identified renewal needs.

School boards will now be restricted to use 80 percent (80%) of their SCI funding to address major building components (for example, foundations, roofs, windows) and systems (for example, HVAC and plumbing). It is up to boards to determine how to prioritize this portion of their SCI funding across individual schools, building components and systems. Boards also have the ability to use this portion of their SCI funding to address renewal needs at schools that have not yet been assessed as well as to address any building components/systems whose condition may have deteriorated since the date of the facility inspection. School boards will be allowed to use the remaining 20 percent (20%) of their new SCI funding to address any locally-identified

2

108

renewal needs that are listed in TCPS. Please see Table 1 below for the categories of restricted (80 percent) and unrestricted (20 percent) uses of SCI funding.

Table 1: Summary of Restricted and Unrestricted Expenditures:

Categories Restricted (80%)

Unrestricted (20%)

A. Substructure (e.g. foundations, basement walls)

Yes Yes

B. Shell/Superstructure (e.g. roofs, exterior walls and windows)

Yes Yes

C. Interiors (e.g. stairs, floor finishes, ceilings) No Yes D. Services (e.g. plumbing, HVAC, fire protection

and electrical) Yes Yes

E. Equipment & Furnishings No Yes F. Special Construction & Demolition No Yes G. Building Sitework (parking lots, site lighting) No Yes Note that school boards with SCI funds in deferred revenue (from 2011-12 to 2014-15) are required to deplete these reserves prior to accessing their 2015-16 allocation. Unspent funds from a board’s 2015-16 allocation will be carried forward and be available to the board in addition to the board’s 2016-17 allocation. Boards must continue to use SCI funding on depreciable renewal expenditures in schools that are expected to remain open and operating for at least five years. Boards should use the funding to address renewal priorities of the board, including addressing health and safety, replacing and repairing building components, improving the energy efficiency of schools, and improving accessibility. Boards are not to use this funding to expand the size of schools, build new schools, or to service debt.

Reporting Renewal Expenditures

Boards are reminded that all school renewal expenditures funded through SCI must be reported in TCPS (and then VFA.facility once available). Boards are expected to report any such outstanding expenditures made between the 2011-12 and 2013-14 school years by January 29th, 2016. School boards that fail to report these expenditures will be unable to access their 2016-17 SCI allocation. All reported expenditures must be consistent with amounts reported by boards to the Ministry in their annual financial statements as submitted in the Education Finance Information System (EFIS). Payments will be made twice a year based on reported expenditures (receiving the lesser of the amount reported in TCPS and EFIS). The Ministry will fund short-term interest costs related to these expenditures reflecting that SCI funding will occur on a bi-annual basis, consistent with other capital programs. As good practice, school boards are also strongly encouraged to report their School Renewal Allocation capital expenditures (for buildings and other non-moveable type

3

109

assets), which is flowed through the School Facility Operations and Renewal Grant, in TCPS for the 2015-16 school year. The Ministry will be moving to mandatory reporting of all School Renewal Allocation expenditures that are capital in nature (for buildings and other non-moveable type assets), in VFA.facility for the 2016-17 school year.

2. Condition Assessment Program The Ministry has now completed the first four years of the Condition Assessment Program. Over this period, over 3,700 school facilities have been assessed across all 72 school boards. 2015 represents the fifth and final year of the assessment cycle that began in 2011. Overall, by the end of 2015, it is estimated that almost 4,600 eligible school facilities will have been assessed through this program. Please see Appendix B for the proposed number of facility assessments to be undertaken in 2015 (note: not all boards will have assessments in 2015). School boards are reminded to take advantage of training offered by VFA, as the condition assessment data is updated in the Total Capital Planning Solution (TCPS) application. To register for in-class training, boards can login to the EDU-VFA Portal. Alternatively, please contact VFA by e-mail at [email protected].

Summary on the Condition of Our Schools

Based on the data collected to date from the Condition Assessment Program, the Ministry has compiled the following summary information about the condition of schools across Ontario and the five-year renewal needs of these schools: Table 1: Assessment Summary Assessment Year

GFA(m2) Number of Schools

Average Age

FCI 5 Year Renewal Needs

2011 4,872,363 903 45 38% $3.9B 2012 4,937,928 979 43 35% $3.9B 2013 5,176,716 932 42 33% $3.6B 2014* 4,924,261 892 38 TBD* TBD* Total 19,911,268 3706 - - - *The Ministry has not yet validated all of the condition assessment data for 2014. Table 2: Renewal Needs by Category (for assessed/validated data) Categories TotaA. Substructure (e.g. foundations, basement walls) $61.7 B. Shell/Superstructure (e.g. roofs, exterior walls and windows) $1,799

lMM

4

110

http://www.edu-vfa.com/

mailto:[email protected]

Categories Total C. Interiors (e.g. stairs, floor finishes, ceilings) $2,781 M D. Services (e.g. plumbing, HVAC, fire protection and electrical) $7,242 M E. Equipment & Furnishings $0.42 M F. Special Construction & Demolition - G. Building Sitework (parking lots, site lighting) $1,492 M

Second Assessment Cycle and Migration to VFA Facility

The information collected through the condition assessment program has been instrumental for the Ministry to support the request for additional renewal funding for schools. Based on this evidence, the Ministry was able to obtain $1.25 billion in School Condition Improvement funding over three years beginning in 2014-15. The Ministry is pleased to announce that we will continue the Condition Assessment Program for another five-year cycle beyond 2015. This means that all eligible schools across Ontario will be assessed between 2016 and 2020. The Ministry will share details about the next five year assessment cycle in the coming months. To provide ongoing support for capital planning and management, the Ministry is pleased to announce that it is currently working with VFA to upgrade the existing TCPS asset management software used by boards. In this regard, the Ministry has arranged with VFA to support boards with their capital planning and management needs through its VFA.facility asset management database. VFA.facility offers new reporting, benchmarking and forecasting tools and an improved user interface, with more robust management reporting capabilities. VFA.facility will be fully operational for all boards in time for the beginning of the next cycle of assessments in 2016. All data currently hosted in TCPS will be migrated to the VFA.facility asset management database over the next year. The migration of data from TCPS to VFA.facility will be phased in over 2015 and be completed by early 2016. School boards will be migrated to the new platform once all their assessments are completed. School boards in Group 1 – set out in Appendix C – will be migrated first, while school boards in Group 4 will be migrated last to allow for the completion of their 2015 assessments. To support the migration of data to VFA.facility and planning for the next assessment cycle, a Migration Technical Committee was established in January 2015 that consists of representatives from six school boards, the Ministry and VFA. The Ministry will provide more detailed information on the migration in a separate memorandum later this year.

Asset Replacement Value

The Ministry and VFA are currently in the process of updating the replacement value of all facilities registered in the system. The revised replacement values will reflect the new classroom loadings associated with the implementation of full day kindergarten and

5

111

the increases to the construction benchmarks announced in Memorandum 2014: B04 (construction cost benchmark for elementary schools is $1,921.46/m² and for secondary schools is $2,096.16/m²). As a result of this adjustment, all assessed renewal needs will also be revised by 4% to provide an adjustment for inflation. No such adjustment has been made since the inception of this program.

Data Clean-up

Boards are reminded to continually update renewal data and events in TCPS. In particular, boards should be advancing any unfunded events to the current year (September 2014 to August 2015), validating their assets (including removing any assets demolished or sold), complete and archive all past projects, and plan ahead for Summer 2015 projects. Boards are encouraged to contact VFA for assistance with these activities at: [email protected].

3. Remaining Service Life Boards are reminded that condition assessment data should be used to update the remaining service life (RSL) of their assets in the Ministry’s Tangible Capital Assets database. The Ministry expects boards to use the data collected from the Condition Assessment Program for this purpose, as it impacts the amortization schedule for renewal investments in the sector. Information about the RSL of schools can provide support for a board’s requests for capital funding. If you have additional questions relating to how to accurately update your remaining service life, please refer to Appendix K of the Ministry’s Tangible Capital Assets Guide. Alternatively, please contact: Contact Name Telephone and Email Soundari Vigneshwaran Financial Analysis & Accountability Branch

(416) 326-9168 [email protected]

4. Key Contacts We thank you for your ongoing co-operation in supporting both the Condition Assessment program and the maintenance of school board facility inventory data in SFIS. For further information about the Condition Assessment Program, please contact the following individuals from the Ministry or VFA:

6

112



Ministry of Education: Contact Name Telephone and Email Mathew Thomas (416) 326-9920

[email protected] Hitesh Chopra

(416) 325-1887 [email protected]

VFA – Program Management: Contact Name Telephone and Email Suzan Bimo (647) 497-5421

[email protected] VFA – Technical Support for TCPS / VFA.Facility: Contact Name Telephone and Email Al Kostiuk (647) 497-5405

[email protected] TCPS Support Line 1-877-333-3537 / (905) 953-

9948 ext. 2517 [email protected]

Sincerely,

Original signed by

Grant Osborn Director Capital Policy and Programs Branch

Appendix A – 2015-16 School Condition Improvement Allocation Appendix B – Appendix B: Assessment Schedule Appendix C – Appendix C: Proposed VFA Facility Migration Groups

7

113





Appendix A: 2015-16 School Condition Improvement Allocation DSB District School Board Name 2015-16 No. Allocation ($) 1 DSB Ontario North East 4,389,817 2 Algoma DSB 5,424,524 3 Rainbow DSB 5,257,755 4 Near North DSB 4,707,203 5.1 Keewatin-Patricia DSB 4,131,287 5.2 Rainy River DSB 2,140,107 6.1 Lakehead DSB 4,788,337 6.2 Superior-Greenstone DSB 2,546,796 7 Bluewater DSB 5,104,453 8 Avon Maitland DSB 4,632,091 9 Greater Essex County DSB 12,667,813 10 Lambton Kent DSB 8,262,449 11 Thames Valley DSB 23,467,560 12 Toronto District School Board 112,047,168 13 Durham District School Board 12,351,004 14 Kawartha Pine Ridge DSB 8,609,035 15 Trillium Lakelands DSB 4,520,792 16 York Region DSB 11,365,864 17 Simcoe County DSB 7,231,698 18 Upper Grand DSB 4,576,364 19 Peel DSB 31,743,223 20 Halton DSB 8,839,024 21 Hamilton-Wentworth DSB 11,760,429 22 DSB of Niagara 11,052,462 23 Grand Erie DSB 6,849,181 24 Waterloo Region DSB 9,354,220 25 Ottawa-Carleton DSB 25,256,459 26 Upper Canada DSB 10,828,593 27 Limestone DSB 6,653,122 28 Renfrew County DSB 3,167,697 29 Hastings and Prince Edward DSB 6,642,169 30.1 Northeastern Catholic DSB 1,548,003 30.2 Nipissing-Parry Sound Catholic DSB 873,546 31 Huron-Superior Catholic DSB 1,933,717 32 Sudbury Catholic DSB 2,053,342 33.1 Northwest Catholic DSB 583,352

8

114

DSB No.

District School Board Name 2015-16 Allocation ($)

33.2 Kenora Catholic DSB 608,150 34.1 Thunder Bay Catholic DSB 2,783,862 34.2 Superior North Catholic DSB 1,046,491 35 Bruce-Grey Catholic DSB 314,495 36 Huron-Perth Catholic DSB 251,766 37 Windsor-Essex Catholic DSB 3,808,187 38 London District Catholic School Board 3,356,528 39 St. Clair Catholic DSB 1,796,921 40 Toronto Catholic DSB 18,140,299 41 PVNC Catholic DSB 1,614,826 42 York Catholic DSB 7,090,673 43 Dufferin-Peel Catholic DSB 7,079,318 44 Simcoe Muskoka Catholic DSB 1,107,300 45 Durham Catholic DSB 2,316,469 46 Halton Catholic DSB 2,529,776 47 Hamilton-Wentworth Catholic DSB 3,764,982 48 Wellington Catholic DSB 514,890 49 Waterloo Catholic DSB 4,239,198 50 Niagara Catholic DSB 4,879,720 51 Brant Haldimand Norfolk Catholic DSB 1,487,865 52 Catholic DSB of Eastern Ontario 2,220,394 53 Ottawa Catholic DSB 7,432,667 54 Renfrew County Catholic DSB 1,854,834 55 Algonquin and Lakeshore Catholic DSB 3,165,595 56 CSD du Nord-Est de l'Ontario 396,189 57 CSD du Grand Nord de l'Ontario 1,735,460 58 CS Viamonde 4,276,332 59 CÉP de l'Est de l'Ontario 2,162,498 60.1 CSD catholique des Grandes Rivières 4,736,752 60.2 CSD catholique Franco-Nord 2,016,711 61 CSD catholique du Nouvel-Ontario 2,686,599 62 CSD catholique des Aurores boréales 452,918 63 CS catholique Providence 1,515,512 64 CSD catholique Centre-Sud 2,686,094 65 CSD catholique de l'Est ontarien 3,237,435 66 CSD catholique du Centre-Est de l'Ontario 3,331,638 Total - 500,000,000

9

115

Appendix B: Assessment Schedule DSB School Board Name 2015 Draft Plan No. 1 DSB Ontario North East - 2 Algoma DSB - 3 Rainbow DSB - 4 Near North DSB - 5.1 Keewatin-Patricia DSB - 5.2 Rainy River DSB - 6.1 Lakehead DSB - 6.2 Superior-Greenstone DSB - 7 Bluewater DSB - 8 Avon Maitland DSB 1 9 Greater Essex County DSB 1 10 Lambton Kent DSB 22 11 Thames Valley DSB 34 12 Toronto District School Board 118 13 Durham District School Board 28 14 Kawartha Pine Ridge DSB 23 15 Trillium Lakelands DSB 15 16 York Region DSB 67 17 Simcoe County DSB 2 18 Upper Grand DSB 23 19 Peel DSB 56 20 Halton DSB 39 21 Hamilton-Wentworth DSB 20 22 DSB of Niagara 37 23 Grand Erie DSB 29 24 Waterloo Region DSB 42 25 Ottawa-Carleton DSB 26 26 Upper Canada DSB 22 27 Limestone DSB - 28 Renfrew County DSB - 29 Hastings and Prince Edward DSB - 30.1 Northeastern Catholic DSB 15 30.2 Nipissing-Parry Sound Catholic DSB 3 31 Huron-Superior Catholic DSB - 32 Sudbury Catholic DSB - 33.1 Northwest Catholic DSB -

10

116

DSB No.

School Board Name 2015 Draft Plan

33.2 Kenora Catholic DSB - 34.1 Thunder Bay Catholic DSB - 34.2 Superior North Catholic DSB - 35 Bruce-Grey Catholic DSB - 36 Huron-Perth Catholic DSB - 37 Windsor-Essex Catholic DSB - 38 London District Catholic School Board 18 39 St. Clair Catholic DSB 18 40 Toronto Catholic DSB 37 41 PVNC Catholic DSB 10 42 York Catholic DSB 19 43 Dufferin-Peel Catholic DSB 31 44 Simcoe Muskoka Catholic DSB 1 45 Durham Catholic DSB 1 46 Halton Catholic DSB 29 47 Hamilton-Wentworth Catholic DSB 3 48 Wellington Catholic DSB - 49 Waterloo Catholic DSB 19 50 Niagara Catholic DSB 16 51 Brant Haldimand Norfolk Catholic DSB 10 52 Catholic DSB of Eastern Ontario 16 53 Ottawa Catholic DSB - 54 Renfrew County Catholic DSB - 55 Algonquin and Lakeshore Catholic DSB - 56 CSD du Nord-Est de l'Ontario 1 57 CSD du Grand Nord de l'Ontario - 58 CS Viamonde 1 59 CÉP de l'Est de l'Ontario - 60.1 CSD catholique des Grandes Rivières - 60.2 CSD catholique Franco-Nord - 61 CSD catholique du Nouvel-Ontario - 62 CSD catholique des Aurores boréales - 63 CS catholique Providence - 64 CSD catholique Centre-Sud 1 65 CSD catholique de l'Est ontarien 4 66 CSD catholique du Centre-Est de l'Ontario 6 - Penetanguishene Protestant Separate School Board - - Moose Factory Island DSAB -

11

117

DSB School Board Name 2015 Draft Plan No. - Moosonee DSAB - - James Bay Lowlands - Total - 864 This plan is based on the number of eligible facilities for each board.

12

118

Appendix C: Proposed VFA Facility Migration Groups Group 1 DSB School Board Name No. 1 District School Board Ontario North East 2 Algoma District School Board 3 Rainbow District School Board 4 Near North District School Board 5.1 Keewatin-Patricia District School Board 5.2 Rainy River District School Board 6.1 Lakehead District School Board 6.2 Superior-Greenstone District School Board 7 Bluewater District School Board 8 Avon Maitland District School Board 31 Huron-Superior Catholic District School Board 32 Sudbury Catholic District School Board 33.1 Northwest Catholic District School Board 33.2 Kenora Catholic District School Board 34.1 Thunder Bay Catholic District School Board 34.2 Superior North Catholic District School Board 35 Bruce-Grey Catholic District School Board 36 Huron-Perth Catholic District School Board 48 Wellington Catholic District School Board 54 Renfrew County Catholic District School Board 55 Algonquin and Lakeshore Catholic District School Board 56 Conseil scolaire de district du Nord-Est de l'Ontario 57 Conseil scolaire de district du Grand Nord de l'Ontario 60.2 Conseil scolaire de district catholique Franco-Nord 61 Conseil scolaire de district catholique du Nouvel-Ontario 62 Conseil scolaire de district catholique des Aurores boréales 63 CS catholique Providence 99 School Board Authorities Group 2 DSB District School Board Name No.

Greater Essex County District School Board Limestone District School Board

9 27

13

119

DSB District School Board Name No. 28 Renfrew County District School Board 29 Hastings and Prince Edward District School Board 37 Windsor-Essex Catholic District School Board 44 Simcoe Muskoka Catholic District School Board 45 Durham Catholic District School Board 53 Ottawa-Carleton Catholic District School Board 59 CÉP de l'Est de l'Ontario 60.1 Conseil scolaire catholique de district des Grandes Rivières 64 Conseil scolaire de district catholique Centre-Sud Group 3 DSB School Board Name No. 15 Trillium Lakelands District School Board 17 Simcoe County District School Board 21 Hamilton-Wentworth District School Board 24 Waterloo Region District School Board 26 Upper Canada District School Board 46 Halton Catholic District School Board Group 4 DSB School Board Name No. 11 Thames Valley District School Board 10 Lambton Kent District School Board 12 Toronto District School Board 13 Durham District School Board 14 Kawartha Pine Ridge District School Board 16 York Region District School Board 18 Upper Grand District School Board 19 Peel District School Board 20 Halton District School Board 22 District School Board of Niagara 23 Grand Erie District School Board 25 Ottawa-Carleton District School Board 30.1 Northeastern Catholic District School Board 30.2 Nipissing-Parry Sound Catholic District School Board 38 English-language Separate District School Board No. 38

14

120

DSB School Board Name No. 39 St. Clair Catholic District School Board 40 Toronto Catholic District School Board 41 42

Peterborough Victoria Northumberland and Clarington Catholic DSB York Catholic District School Board

43 Dufferin Peel Catholic District School Board 47 Hamilton-Wentworth Catholic District School Board 49 Waterloo Catholic District School Board 50 51

Niagara Catholic District School Board Brant Haldimand Norfolk Catholic District School Board

52 Eastern Ontario Catholic District School Board 58 CS Viamonde 65 66

Conseil scolaire de district catholique de l'est Ontarien Conseil scolaire de district catholique du Centre-Est de l'Ontario

15

121

2015: SB05

Ministère de l'Éducation Direction des politiques et des programmes de l’éducation de l’enfance en difficulté 18e étage, 900, rue Bay Toronto ON M7A 1L2

Special Education Funding in 2015-16 Page 1 of 17 Memorandum 2015:SB05 from Barry Finlay March 26, 2015

Ministry of Education Special Education Policy and Programs Branch 18th floor 900 Bay Street Toronto ON M7A 1L2

MEMORANDUM TO: Directors of Education Superintendents of Special Education

FROM: Barry Finlay Director Special Education Policy and Programs Branch

DATE: March 26, 2015

SUBJECT: Special Education Funding in 2015-16

First, I would like to thank you and your staff for your continued efforts to improve the learning, achievement and well-being of students with special education needs in your schools. As a result, we continue to see improved achievement results and a narrowing of the achievement gap for students with special education needs. You are making a difference.

The purpose of this memorandum is to provide you with information on the Special Education Grant (SEG) for the 2015-16 school year. This memorandum will provide you with details on the on-going transition to a new High Needs Amount (HNA) funding approach and with detailed information regarding the HNA Special Education Statistical Prediction Model (SESPM), the HNA Measures of Variability (MOV) and the HNA Base Amount for Collaboration and Integration. Additionally, this memorandum will also provide you with an overview of the changes being made to the Facilities Amount (FA) allocation.

Overall, in 2015-16 the SEG is projected to be approximately $2.72 billion.

NOTICE: Section 234 of the Education Act authorizes the Lieutenant Governor in Council to make regulations governing the making of grants. Such regulations, as they relate to the 2015–2016 fiscal year, have not yet been made. The information set out in this memorandum would come into effect only if such regulations are made that coincide with this memorandum.

The information included in this memorandum is provided for information purposes only and is not binding.

Appendix E

122

Special Education Funding for 2015-16 Page 2 of 17 Memorandum 2015:SB05 from Barry Finlay March 26, 2015

It is anticipated that the funding regulations for the 2015–2016 fiscal year would be entitled: Grants for Student Needs – Legislative Grants for the 2015–2016 School Board Fiscal Year; Calculation of Average Daily Enrolment for the 2015–2016 School Board Fiscal Year; and Calculation of Fees for Pupils for the 2015–2016 School Board Fiscal Year.

The Ministry will advise if such regulations are made.

A. HIGH NEEDS AMOUNT (HNA) ALLOCATION In March 2014, after extensive consultations with stakeholder representatives, including the Special Education Funding Working Group, the ministry announced a four year transition to a new HNA funding model. This transition will provide greater fairness and equity within the system by phasing out the historical HNA Per Pupil Amounts and moving to an allocation composed of the SESPM, MOV and Base Amount for Collaboration and Integration. As communicated last year, the legacy HNA Per Pupil Amounts will be phased out over four years, with a 25% reduction per year, beginning in 2014-15. In each of the following three years, the HNA Per Pupil Amounts will be reduced as follows: to 50% in 2015-16; to 25% in 2016-17 and completely eliminated by 2017-18.

The new HNA allocation will better reflect the variation among boards with respect to students with special education needs and boards’ abilities to meet those needs. The new HNA allocation will create redistributive impacts on school boards and these will be mitigated by phasing in this transition over four years.

Stability During Transition To New HNA Allocation As promised in 2014-15, the Ministry is maintaining the current funding levels of the HNA allocation during the transition. To provide this stability and to mitigate projected enrolment declines in 2014-15 and 2015-16, the Ministry will hold the provincial HNA total at $1.05 billion over the four year transition to the new HNA model.

2015-16 High Needs Amount (HNA)

The 2015–16 HNA allocation will continue to eliminate the legacy HNA per-pupil amounts, which will be funded at 50%, and to increase the proportion of funding that is allocated through both the SESPM and MOV while the Base Amount for Collaboration and Integration will be maintained at $450,000 per board.

The 2015–16 HNA Allocation will be made up of the following:

• the historical HNA Per Pupil Amount allocation, funded at 50% of historical HNA Per Pupil Amounts. This component is projected to be $495.7 million;

• the Special Education Statistical Prediction Model (SESPM). This component is projected to be $391.4 million;

• the Measures of Variability (MOV) amount. This component is projected to be $130.5 million; and

123


• the Base Amount for Collaboration and Integration. This component is projected to be $32.4 million, which represents $450,000 per board.

Further details regarding these HNA allocation components can be found below. In addition, a copy of the projected HNA MOV and SESPM amounts for each school board, which can be found in the HNA Table of the Grants For Student Needs — Legislative Grants For The 2015-2016 School Board Fiscal Year, is also copied below.

Special Education Statistical Prediction Model (SESPM)

The logistic regression Special Education Statistical Prediction Model developed by Dr. J. Douglas Willms has been updated for 2015–16 and it draws from 2012–13 Ontario Ministry of Education anonymized student data (most recent available), merged with University of New Brunswick – Canadian Research Institute for Social Policy Census indicators from the 2006 Canadian Census data, to estimate the number of students predicted to receive special education programs and services in each of Ontario's district school boards.

Note: The Ministry is in the process of reviewing the 2011 Census and National Household Survey data to determine if it will be appropriate to use in various Grants for Student Needs (GSN) allocations, such as the SESPM. In previous years, it has taken up to four or more years from the year of the Census to reflect the Census data in the appropriate GSN allocations as it takes time to obtain, review and analyze the data. Given the significant change from the Long Form Census to the National Household Survey, this process may take at least as long.

The board-specific prediction value for each school board reflects the relationship between the actual percent of students reported to be receiving special education programs and/or services in the school board and the average level of socioeconomic status of all students enrolled in the school board.

The following demographic factors were used:

• Occupational structure,

• Median income,

• Parent level of education,

• Percent families below Statistic Canada's low-income cut-off occupational structure,

• Percent unemployed,

• Percent Aboriginal families,

• Percent recent immigrants,

• Percent moved in previous year, and

• Metropolitan influence zone.

The likelihood that a child will receive special education programs and/or services is estimated with a logistic regression model, which models the probability of a child being

124


designated as reported to be receiving special education programs and/or services (e.g., Y1 = 1 if reported; Y1 = 0 if not reported) as a function of a set of n covariates or predictors.

The analysis entailed the estimation of 14 separate logistic regression models – one for each of the 12 categories within the Ministry’s definitions of exceptionalities1, one for students ‘non-identified with an Individual Education Plan (IEP),’ and one for students ‘non-identified without an IEP.’

1 There are five categories and twelve definitions of exceptionalities as follows: BEHAVIOUR – Behaviour; INTELLECTUAL – Giftedness, Mild Intellectual Disability, Developmental Disability; COMMUNICATION – Autism, Deaf and Hard-of-Hearing, Language Impairment, Speech Impairment, Learning Disability; PHYSICAL – Physical Disability, Blind and Low Vision; and MULTIPLE EXCEPTIONALITIES – Multiple Exceptionalities

For each school board, the prediction formulae for these 14 models were used to predict the total number of students in each category, given the demographic characteristics of the students served by the school board, and then summed to achieve an estimate of the predicted number of students who could be expected to receive special education programs and/or services.

The functional form of the model is:

1, given a student ' s 1 Probability Y1 = set of background = [1 + exp − (b +

characteristics 0 b1x1 + b 2 x2 + ..... + b n xn )]

where Y1 denotes whether or not a child was reported as receiving special education programs and/or services; and x1 .... xn are the child's grade, gender and 2006 Census-derived demographic characteristics.

The regression coefficients, β0, β1, ...... βn are estimated from the anonymized data for all Ontario students in 2012–13. With these estimates the model estimates the probability that a student with a particular set of background characteristics would receive special education programs and/or services.

Therefore, in a school board with 10,000 students, where each student's age, grade, and Census-derived demographic characteristics are known, the prediction model can be used to estimate the probability that each student would receive special education programs and/or services. The sum of these probabilities for the 10,000 students provides an estimate of the total number of students that are likely to receive special education programs and/or services in that board.

The board-by-board predicted value is then multiplied by the board's ADE to determine each board's proportion of this allocation.

125


Measures of Variability (MOV)

The 2015-16 MOV Amount will be approximately $130.5 million or 12.4% of the HNA allocation.

The provincial MOV Amount will be distributed among all school boards based on five categories of data where each category has an assigned percentage of the total MOV amount. Each category has one or more factors and each factor has an assigned percentage of the category total.

Twenty-five factors in total, as described in the table below, will be used in the calculation of the 2015-16 HNA MOV Amount.

• For Categories 1 to 3 each board’s MOV amount is calculated as follows: a) The percent of MOV funding available for each of the category/subcategory

(from the table below) multiplied by the percent of funding available for the factor (from the factors table below) multiplied by the provincial MOV amount determines the provincial funding for that factor.

b) The board’s prevalence for each factor determines the weight based on the ranges provided below.

c) The board’s weight for the factor multiplied by the board’s ADE determines the board’s factor number. The board’s factor number is divided by the total of all 72 boards’ factor numbers combined for that factor and multiplied by the result of step (a) above for that factor to determine the funding for the board for that factor.

• For Category 4, Remote and Rural Adjustment, school boards will receive a percentage of the following components of their Remote and Rural Allocation - Board Enrolment, Distance/Urban Factor/French-Language Equivalence and School Dispersion.

• For Category 5, FNMI adjustment, school boards will receive a percentage of their FNMI Per-Pupil Amount allocation.

• A board’s total MOV amount is the sum of funding generated through the calculations for all 5 categories and 25 factors.

126


Category Factor(s) % of MOV Funding for Category

% of MOV Funding for Sub-Category

1 Students reported as receiving special education programs and services

2012-13 data as reported by boards (one factor)

32%

2 Participation and achievement in EQAO assessments by students with special education needs

2013-14 data for: 32% Sub-Category 2A: Grade 3 students (including gifted) with special education needs who were exempt, below, or reached Level 1 (six factors)

11%

Sub-Category 2B: Grade 6 students (including gifted) with special education needs who were exempt, below, or reached Level 1 (six factors)

11%

Sub-Category 2C: Grade 3 and Grade 6 students with special education needs (including gifted) with three or more Accommodations (two factors)

10%

3 Credit Accumulation and participation in Locally Developed and Alternative non-credit courses (K-Courses) by students with special education needs.

2012-13 data for: 16% Sub-Category 3A: Students with special education needs earned 5 or less credits in Grade 9 or earned 13 or less credits in Grade 10 (two factors)

13%

Sub-Category 3B: Grade 9 and Grade 10 Students with Special Education Needs enrolled in Locally Developed Courses (two factors)

1.4%

Sub-Category 3C: Grade 9 and Grade 10 Students with Special Education Needs enrolled in K-Courses (two factors)

1.6%

4 Remote and 2015-16 Projected ADE for: 12%

127

Category Factor(s) % of MOV Funding for Category

% of MOV Funding for Sub-Category


Rural Adjustment *

Sub-Category 4A: Board Enrolment This component recognizes that smaller school boards often have higher per-pupil costs for goods and services. (one factor)

6%

Sub-Category 4B: Distance/Urban Factor/French-Language Equivalence This component takes into account the additional costs of goods and services related to remoteness and the absence of nearby urban centres (one factor)

1.3%

Sub-Category 4C: School Dispersion This component recognizes the higher costs of providing goods and services to students in widely dispersed schools (one factor)

4.7%

5 FNMI Adjustment *

Calculated by using the estimated percentage of First Nations, Métis, and Inuit population derived from 2006 Census data, a weighting factor and 2015-16 projected ADE (one factor)

8%

*Note: Further details regarding the Remote and Rural Allocation and the FNMI Per-Pupil Amount Allocation can be found in the GSN’s Technical Paper. With regards to FNMI Adjustment, please note that only the FNMI Per-Pupil Amount Allocation of the FNMI Supplement is used in this category.

Category 1: Prevalence of students reported as receiving special education programs and services by school boards. Prevalence for this category is the total number of students reported as receiving special education programs and services divided by total enrolment. (one factor)

Prevalence of students reported as receiving special education programs and services:

32% of MOV Weight Range

0.8 < 11.43% 0.9 ≥ 11.43% to < 14.69%

128

Prevalence of students reported as receiving special education programs and services:

32% of MOVWeight Range


1.0 ≥ 14.69% to < 17.96% 1.1 ≥ 17.96% to < 21.22% 1.2 ≥ 21.22%

Category 2: Participation and achievement in EQAO assessments by students with special education needs divided by the total number of students with special education needs who were eligible to take that EQAO assessment (Elementary enrolment counts only).

Sub-Category 2A: Prevalence of participation and achievement in Grade 3 EQAO assessments by students with special education needs, including gifted, who were exempt, below, or reached Level 1 or less (six factors).

2A – EQAO Achievement – Grade 3; 11% of MOV

Weight Males - Reading

(20% of 2A)

Females – Reading

(15% of 2A)

Males – Writing

(20% of 2A)

Females – Writing

(15% of 2A)

Males – Math

(15% of 2A)

Females – Math

(15% of 2A) 0.8 < 16.08% < 15.05% < 8.73% < 7.37% < 15.27% < 17.59%0.9 ≥ 16.08%

to < 20.68%≥ 15.05%

to < 19.35% ≥ 8.73%

to < 11.22%≥ 7.37%

to < 9.48%≥ 15.27%

to < 19.63%≥ 17.59%

to < 22.62%1 ≥ 20.68%

to < 25.27%≥ 19.35%

to < 23.65% ≥ 11.22%

to < 13.72%≥ 9.48% to

< 11.58%≥ 19.63%

to < 24.00%≥ 22.62%

to < 27.64%1.1 ≥ 25.27%

to < 29.87%≥ 23.65%

to < 27.94%≥ 13.72%

to < 16.21% ≥ 11.58%to < 13.69%

≥ 24.00%to < 28.36%

≥ 27.64%to < 32.67%

1.2 ≥ 29.87% ≥ 27.94% ≥ 16.21% ≥ 13.69% ≥ 28.36% ≥ 32.67%

129


Sub-Category 2B: Prevalence of participation and achievement in Grade 6 EQAO assessments by students with special education needs, including gifted, who were exempt, below, or reached Level 1 or less (six factors).

2B – EQAO Achievement – Grade 6; 11% of MOV

Weight Males - Reading

(20% of 2B)

Females – Reading

(15% of 2B)

Males – Writing

(20% of 2B)

Females – Writing

(15% of 2B)

Males – Math

(15% of 2B)

Females – Math

(15% of 2B) 0.8 < 10.05% < 8.96% < 7.01% < 5.47% < 26.30% < 28.72%0.9 ≥ 10.05%

to < 12.92%≥ 8.96%

to < 11.52%≥ 7.01%

to < 9.02%≥ 5.47%

to < 7.03%≥ 26.30%

to < 33.82%≥ 28.72%

to < 36.93%1 ≥ 12.92%

to < 15.79%≥ 11.52%

to < 14.08%≥ 9.02% to

< 11.02%≥ 7.03% to

< 8.59%≥ 33.82%

to < 41.34%≥ 36.93%

to < 45.13%1.1 ≥ 15.79%

to < 18.66%≥ 14.08%

to < 16.64%≥ 11.02%

to < 13.03%≥ 8.59% to

< 10.16%≥ 41.34%

to < 48.85%≥ 45.13%

to < 53.34%1.2 ≥ 18.66% ≥ 16.64% ≥ 13.03% ≥ 10.16% ≥ 48.85% ≥ 53.34%

Sub-Category 2C: Prevalence of students with special education needs (including gifted) who required 3 or more accommodations (e.g., extra time, coloured paper, SEA equipment use, etc.) for EQAO Grade 3 and Grade 6 assessments (two factors).

2C – EQAO accommodations; 10% of MOV

Weight Grade 3 (50% of 2C)

Grade 6 (50% of 2C)

0.8 < 45.13% < 35.32% 0.9 ≥ 45.13% to < 58.03% ≥ 35.32% to < 45.41% 1 ≥ 58.03% to < 70.92% ≥ 45.41% to < 55.50%

1.1 ≥ 70.92% to < 83.82% ≥ 55.50% to < 65.59% 1.2 ≥ 83.82% ≥ 65.59%

130


Category 3: Credit accumulation and participation in locally developed and alternative non-credit courses (K-Courses) by students with special education needs (Secondary enrolment counts only).

Sub-Category 3A: Prevalence of Grade 9 and 10 credit accumulation for students with special education needs. Prevalence for Grade 9 is that of those who earned 5 or less credits; and prevalence for Grade 10 is that of those who earned 13 or less credits (two factors).

3A – Credit accumulation; 13% of MOV

Weight Earned 5 or less credits in

Grade 9 (40% of 3A)

Earned 13 or less credits in Grade 10 (60% of 3A)

0.8 < 9.81% < 15.88%0.9 ≥ 9.81% to < 12.61% ≥ 15.88% to < 20.42%1 ≥ 12.61% to < 15.42% ≥ 20.42% to < 24.96%

1.1 ≥ 15.42% to < 18.22% ≥ 24.96% to < 29.49%1.2 ≥ 18.22% ≥ 29.49%

Sub-Category 3B: Prevalence of Grade 9 and Grade 10 students with special education needs enrolled in locally developed courses (two factors).

3B – Enrolled in LD Courses; 1.4% of MOV

Weight Enrolled in LD Courses

Grade 9 (40% of 3B)

Enrolled in LD Courses Grade 10

(60% of 3B) 0.8 < 19.01% < 18.14%0.9 ≥ 19.01% to < 24.44% ≥ 18.14% to < 23.32%1 ≥ 24.44% to < 29.88% ≥ 23.32% to < 28.51%

1.1 ≥ 29.88% to < 35.31% ≥ 28.51% to < 33.69%1.2 ≥ 35.31% ≥ 33.69%

131


Sub-Category 3C: Prevalence of Grade 9 and Grade 10 students with special education needs enrolled in alternative non-credit courses (K-courses) (two factors).

3C – Enrolled in alternative non-credit courses (K Courses); 1.6% of MOV

Weight Enrolled in K-Courses

Grade 9 (40% of 3C)

Enrolled in K-Courses Grade 10

(60% of 3C)

0.8 < 6.06% < 4.16%0.9 ≥ 6.06% to < 7.80% ≥ 4.16% to < 5.35%1 ≥ 7.80% to < 9.53% ≥ 5.35% to < 6.54%

1.1 ≥ 9.53% to < 11.26% ≥ 6.54% to < 7.73%1.2 ≥ 11.26% ≥ 7.73%

Category 4: Remote and Rural Adjustment

The MOV Remote and Rural Adjustment will provide school boards with funding based on 3 sub-categories/factors – they are:

• Sub-Category 4A: Board Enrolment, which recognizes that school boards with fewer pupils often have higher per-pupil costs for goods and services (one factor);

• Sub-Category 4B: Distance/Urban Factor/French-Language Equivalence, which takes into account the additional costs of goods and services related to remoteness and the absence of nearby urban centres (one factor); and

• Sub-Category 4C: School Dispersion, which recognizes the higher costs of providing goods and services to students in widely dispersed schools (one factor).

In an effort to align the Remote and Rural Category of the MOV with the GSN’s Geographic Circumstances Grant for 2015-16, these sub-categories are funded at a percentage of the boards Remote and Rural Allocation for 2015-16.

Category 5: First Nations, Métis, and Inuit Education Adjustment

Each school board will receive a percentage of their FNMI Per-Pupil Amount allocation, part of the FNMI Supplement. This allocation estimates the percentage of First Nations, Métis, and Inuit population (please refer to 2015-16 Technical Paper for more details regarding the FNMI Per-Pupil allocation). This complements the Ministry’s effort to better reflect the variation among boards with respect to students with special education needs and the ability of boards to meet those needs (one factor).

132


The projected HNA MOV and SESPM amounts for each school board can be found in the HNA Table of the Grants For Student Needs — Legislative Grants For The 2015-16 School Board Fiscal Year (which is copied below).

High Needs Base Amount for Collaboration and Integration

The High Needs Base Amount for Collaboration and Integration provides every board a minimum level of base funding of $450,000 to establish and / or access high needs services, while also exploring collaborative and integrated approaches to serve their students with special education needs.

B. FACILITIES AMOUNT (FA) CHANGES

The Guidelines for these programs are reviewed and updated on an annual basis. New Guidelines for Educational Programs for Students in Government Approved Care and/or Treatment, Custody and Correctional (CTCC) Facilities 2015-16 have been released on the Ministry of Education, Financial Analysis and Accountability Branchwebsite.

These Guidelines are designed to simplify the administration of CTCC programs by consolidating the following documents:

• Guidelines 2005-06 For Approval of Educational Programs for Pupils In Government Approved Care and/or Treatment, Custody and Correctional Facilities

• Policy/Program Memorandum No. 85 – Educational Programs for Pupils in Government Approved Care and/or Treatment Facilities

• Ministry of Education Essential Elements for Education Programs for Pupils in Government Approved Care and/or Treatment, Custody and Correctional Facilities (February 2009)

The above named documents are no longer in force and school boards should refer to the 2015-16 Guidelines for any questions related to the administration of CTCC programs.

While there are no substantive policy changes from the 2014-15 Guidelines, the language has been updated to reflect regulatory changes and current practices and there is a new section outlining the new vision for education programs in CTCC facilities that aligns with the Ministry’s goals in Achieving Excellence: A Renewed Vision for Education in Ontario(2014).

A new funding allocation model and criteria will be used to allocate $2.5 million in FA funding for new Enhanced Education and Treatment (EET) programs. EET programs are intended to address service pressures that have emerged in relation to identified system and local needs, particularly Francophone students, students who are First Nations, Métis and Inuit (FNMI), students in rural, remote and under-served communities and students with Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorder (FASD). It is expected that new EET programs will integrate health support services within the education program. More information and the

133

http://www.faab.edu.gov.on.ca/

http://www.edu.gov.on.ca/eng/about/renewedVision.pdf


supplementary application form can be found on the Ministry of Education, Financial Analysis and Accountability Branch website.

The Ministry is also inviting school boards to submit applications for education programs in Community Based Youth Justice (CBYJ) facilities to increase the capacity of the system to meet the educational needs of youth attending CBYJ facilities. There is $2 million available to fund both new and existing CBYJ programs in 2015-16.

Thank you once again for your work with students with special education needs.

Sincerely,

Barry FinlayDirector Special Education Policy and Programs Branch

cc. Special Education Advisory Committees

134

http://www.faab.edu.gov.on.ca/


Table 1 2015-16 HIGH NEEDS AMOUNT

Item Column 1 Name of board

Column 2 High needs

per pupil amount

Column 3 Projected

measures of variability

(MOV) amount

Column 4 Projected SESPM amount

($) ($) ($)

1 Algoma District School Board 740.53 1,569,140 2,091,855

2 Algonquin and Lakeshore Catholic District School Board 606.42 1,145,614 2,388,688

3 Avon Maitland District School Board 502.87 913,723 3,465,059

4 Bluewater District School Board 628.62 1,066,868 3,695,962

5 Brant Haldimand Norfolk Catholic District School Board 386.39 828,109 2,033,993

6 Bruce-Grey Catholic District School Board 612.19 467,397 861,951

7 Catholic District School Board of Eastern Ontario 704.49 1,213,405 2,905,253

8 Conseil des écoles publiques de l’Est de l’Ontario 507.29 1,246,157 2,607,705

9 Conseil scolaire catholique Providence 427.51 1,030,733 1,584,944

10 Conseil scolaire de district catholique Centre-Sud 505.26 1,283,069 2,689,651

11 Conseil scolaire de district catholique de l’Est ontarien 786.23 1,044,593 2,187,029

12 Conseil scolaire de district catholique des Aurores boréales

1,498.34 298,753 145,437

13 Conseil scolaire de district catholique des Grandes Rivières

506.2 1,045,537 1,336,469

14 Conseil scolaire de district catholique du Centre-Est de l’Ontario

605.22 1,439,068 3,805,380

15 Conseil scolaire de district catholique du Nouvel-Ontario 740.04 1,124,176 1,377,856

16 Conseil scolaire de district catholique Franco-Nord 1,161.84 515,336 650,858

17 Conseil scolaire de district du Grand Nord de l’Ontario 1,673.35 629,633 477,978

18 Conseil scolaire de district du Nord-Est de l’Ontario 1,586.50 623,140 407,324

19 Conseil scolaire Viamonde 376.35 1,248,045 1,784,337

20 District School Board of Niagara 355.46 2,181,466 7,774,749

21 District School Board Ontario North East 728.52 1,320,233 1,762,950

22 Dufferin-Peel Catholic District School Board 375.13 4,464,607 15,203,410

135


Item Column 1 Column 2 Column 3 Column 4 Name of board High needs

per pupil amount

Projected measures of

variability (MOV)

amount

Projected SESPM amount

($) ($) ($)

23 Durham Catholic District School Board 383.93 1,176,279 4,165,217

24 Durham District School Board 521.34 3,871,944 13,370,678

25 Grand Erie District School Board 521.7 1,639,100 5,736,677

26 Greater Essex County District School Board 414.03 2,132,361 7,331,507

27 Halton Catholic District School Board 445.58 1,538,828 5,845,650

28 Halton District School Board 601.81 3,188,440 10,972,404

29 Hamilton-Wentworth Catholic District School Board 522.57 1,587,995 6,020,954

30 Hamilton-Wentworth District School Board 443.28 3,096,095 10,495,706

31 Hastings and Prince Edward District School Board 619.22 1,297,012 3,289,569

32 Huron Perth Catholic District School Board 359.45 489,660 934,578

33 Huron-Superior Catholic District School Board 391.66 920,378 1,000,465

34 Kawartha Pine Ridge District School Board 583.61 1,958,291 6,608,330

35 Keewatin-Patricia District School Board 1,235.18 1,179,757 1,045,615

36 Kenora Catholic District School Board 822.37 362,306 309,677

37 Lakehead District School Board 700.11 1,275,314 2,019,692

38 Lambton Kent District School Board 452.78 1,286,048 4,582,841

39 Limestone District School Board 771.86 1,401,113 4,347,355

40 London District Catholic School Board 410.92 1,079,801 3,862,249

41 Near North District School Board 804.64 1,215,042 2,262,719

42 Niagara Catholic District School Board 487.42 1,179,043 4,535,667

43 Nipissing-Parry Sound Catholic District School Board 1,058.34 427,819 599,030

44 Northeastern Catholic District School Board 1,157.95 490,828 470,354

45 Northwest Catholic District School Board 575.02 422,378 253,695

46 Ottawa-Carleton District School Board 498 4,054,760 13,512,096

47 Ottawa Catholic District School Board 379.82 2,192,192 7,831,350

48 Peel District School Board 339.58 8,833,842 27,624,995

136


Item Column 1 Column 2 Column 3 Column 4 Name of board High needs

per pupil amount

Projected measures of

variability (MOV)

amount

Projected SESPM amount

($) ($) ($)

49

Peterborough Victoria Northumberland and Clarington Catholic District School Board

693.08 985,056 2,956,615

50 Rainbow District School Board 496.6 1,471,708 2,980,893

51 Rainy River District School Board 1,016.84 541,001 555,787

52 Renfrew County Catholic District School Board 603.21 641,833 1,000,278

53 Renfrew County District School Board 407.44 1,055,916 2,168,357

54 Simcoe County District School Board 585.03 3,123,742 10,838,534

55 Simcoe Muskoka Catholic District School Board 474.76 1,304,416 4,424,550

56 St. Clair Catholic District School Board 481.01 865,429 1,773,594

57 Sudbury Catholic District School Board 366.3 815,196 1,315,085

58 Superior-Greenstone District School Board 766.72 345,769 330,210

59 Superior North Catholic District School Board 1,541.37 189,734 142,267

60 Thames Valley District School Board 479.03 4,297,328 15,192,102

61 Thunder Bay Catholic District School Board 591.46 1,096,301 1,661,801

62 Toronto Catholic District School Board 604.59 4,648,063 17,896,521

63 Toronto District School Board 522.93 13,331,929 47,216,933

64 Trillium Lakelands District School Board 738.12 1,278,553 3,628,160

65 Upper Canada District School Board 750.59 2,155,366 6,216,231

66 Upper Grand District School Board 365.38 1,776,539 6,525,108

67 Waterloo Catholic District School Board 485.45 1,140,973 4,013,502

68 Waterloo Region District School Board 487.24 3,746,584 12,042,965

69 Wellington Catholic District School Board 361.92 721,571 1,516,142

70 Windsor-Essex Catholic District School Board 486.85 1,219,057 4,078,513

71 York Catholic District School Board 504.53 2,652,927 10,120,343

72 York Region District School Board 447.56 6,072,587 22,556,624

137


This page has intentionally been left blank

138

Education Funding

School Board Funding Projections for the 2015–16 School Year

Spring 2015


Appendix F

139

Une publication équivalente est disponible en français sous le titre suivant : Financement de l’éducation : Projections des subventions destinées aux conseils scolaires pour l’année scolaire 2015 2016, printemps 2015, sur le site Web du ministère de l’Éducation.

ISBN : (PDF)

140

School Board Funding Projections, 2015–16 1

School Board Funding Projections for the 2015–16 School Year

The following tables contain projected board‐by‐board allocations of the Grants for Student Needs (GSN) including other related information for the 2015–16 school year. The funding projections have been prepared by the Ministry of Education and are based on enrolment and other data provided by school boards. The tables also contain board‐by‐board allocations from prior years.*

These projections include the impact of enrolment change, new investments, savings measures, and structural refinements on GSN funding levels for the 2015–16 school year. The actual revenue that a school board receives through the GSN over the course of the school year may change as in‐year information on enrolment and other factors become available. In addition, some individual grants may not be comparable year over year due to grant realignments, changes in grant structure, the introduction of new grants and allocations, as well as changes in accounting practices. The data in the tables from prior years is drawn from the most recent financial information submitted to the Ministry by school boards.

It should be noted that, in 2014‐15, there was a significant increase in total funding. This increase was largely due to the movement and integration of funding for Ontario’s Full‐Day Kindergarten (FDK) program from Education Programs – Other (EPO) into the GSN.

Grants for Operating and Other Purposes

This section shows the grant allocations for operating and other purposes for each board listed by grant and allocation, as well funding for selected capital funding costs and funding for School Authorities. Details on how operating grants are calculated are found in the Technical Paper, 2015–16, Spring 2015.

Average Daily Enrolment

The measure of enrolment used for funding purposes is the Average Daily Enrolment (ADE) of pupils. Boards report the full‐time equivalent of students enrolled at each school as of October 31 and March 31, which are the two count dates in the school

* This document includes data beginning in 2002–03. Data from 1998–99 through 2001–02 is available

on the Ministry of Education's website.

141

2 School Board Funding Projections, 2015–16

board fiscal year. The calculation of ADE is based on an average of full‐time equivalent students reported on the two count dates.

Average Utilization of School Facilities

School utilization measures the extent to which a school is operating at full capacity. The average school utilization data provided for each board is based on 2014–15 data, as provided by school boards. For the purposes of this section, a “school facility” is defined as an open and operating elementary or secondary school facility that has an ADE greater than zero.

Capital Programs

The Capital Programs table shows the Government funding commitments for the following capital programs:

● New Pupil Places and Other Capital Programs, which includes Primary Class Size Reduction Capital, Prohibitive to Repair, Growth Schools, French‐Language Capital Transitional, Green Schools Pilot, Capital Priorities, and 2010–11 Temporary Accommodation;

● Full‐Day Kindergarten, which supports the accommodation needs of the FDK program;

● Good Places to Learn Renewal; and

● New Capital Funding beginning in 2011–12, including allocations for Temporary Accommodation, School Condition Improvement, major Capital Priorities projects, and the Retrofitting of School Space for Child Care.

These tables reflect changes in capital funding approach that were introduced in 2010–11. Previously, capital funding was allocated to boards to support the principal and interest costs of boards' cumulative capital expenditures. Funding is now recognized based on capital program expenditures. To reflect this change, the table, titled Expenditures from 2002–03 to 2014–15, shows the expenditures made by boards each year (as opposed to the annual funding provided for long‐term capital financing). This table also shows the remaining capital funding available to boards under existing programs.

142

March 2015

Projected School Board Funding for the 2015-16 School Year(73) Provincial Totals

Grants for Operating and Other Purposes 1 2002-03 Actuals

2003-04 Actuals

2004-05 Actuals

2005-06 Actuals

2006-07 Actuals

2007-08 Actuals

2008-09 Actuals

2009-10 Actuals

2010-11 Actuals

2011-12 Actuals

2012-13 Actuals 2013-14 Actuals 2014-15 Revised

Estimates2015-16

Projections

1. Pupil Foundation Grant 8,075,061,286 8,164,747,394 8,411,386,751 8,856,954,477 8,324,100,385 8,722,112,959 9,058,127,594 9,253,961,913 9,533,573,718 9,810,602,145 9,772,503,430 9,556,199,172 10,488,728,235 10,452,718,208

2. School Foundation Grant 1,122,132,244 1,211,243,561 1,276,917,472 1,321,596,390 1,357,128,147 1,394,686,259 1,385,684,124 1,371,013,115 1,418,678,099 1,420,763,931

3. Special Education Grant 1,624,805,781 1,836,999,359 1,853,789,176 1,968,483,409 2,003,504,920 2,098,595,740 2,176,709,590 2,248,243,417 2,318,167,473 2,511,041,923 2,496,118,477 2,483,308,568 2,712,752,500 2,721,824,990

4. Language Grant 444,048,784 456,847,749 530,870,197 551,723,099 565,349,974 577,410,913 597,045,247 608,191,421 629,444,558 649,681,421 643,832,010 641,842,377 663,647,270 664,649,208

5. First Nations, Métis, and Inuit Education Supplement 12,072,115 21,581,790 28,604,891 42,959,636 39,158,029 40,614,791 42,261,105 46,789,897 50,764,743

6. Geographic Circumstances Grant 189,567,139 234,951,705 268,788,189 274,877,880 165,236,917 186,546,530 189,920,094 195,122,818 194,265,621 192,756,854 183,296,414 180,641,622 200,885,111 193,021,871

7. Learning Opportunities Grant 297,506,775 441,691,985 514,183,563 523,695,723 391,539,143 404,953,606 418,480,276 418,532,290 462,353,856 477,348,444 495,774,164 491,356,994 505,224,434 504,578,693

8. Safe and Accepting Schools Supplement 43,530,045 44,312,402 44,844,330 46,085,657 45,948,395 45,511,753 47,141,321 46,988,273

9. Program Enhancement Grant 35,332,500 45,586,600 45,538,350 45,326,050 45,036,550

10. Continuing Education and Other Programs Grant 101,360,588 101,770,993 99,942,691 102,930,341 104,603,097 106,239,518 123,315,403 135,627,506 140,371,510 143,933,671 145,649,948 153,750,414 154,460,824 153,183,403

11. Cost Adjustment and Teacher Qualifications and Experience Grant 594,772,008 628,853,515 659,347,722 625,117,769 711,443,643 806,118,385 949,391,613 1,083,786,735 1,271,516,648 1,415,926,033 1,381,810,234 1,450,202,347 1,704,466,174 1,752,925,503

12. Student Transportation Grant 629,266,993 651,293,655 688,456,431 721,912,654 742,961,683 781,955,083 816,021,615 827,628,406 839,763,167 852,455,036 850,030,249 866,568,097 879,969,319 887,747,050

13. Declining Enrolment Adjustment 38,169,459 109,352,779 88,595,314 123,963,177 68,437,839 67,055,692 70,460,454 59,451,450 59,663,626 60,262,568 62,179,997 72,882,355 66,925,160 33,133,178

14. School Board Administration and Governance Grant 462,643,860 467,294,486 477,146,241 487,601,247 493,812,937 501,083,592 526,835,022 540,384,766 542,350,367 548,842,026 541,304,315 537,237,563 573,076,238 576,005,002

15. School Operations Allocation 1,439,709,979 1,476,282,111 1,582,417,483 1,656,612,928 1,680,847,352 1,741,175,070 1,812,479,479 1,894,724,880 1,919,215,938 1,961,995,092 1,979,715,261 1,983,596,864 2,058,936,437 2,051,378,025

16. School Renewal Allocation (excluding GPL) 266,848,483 293,308,313 324,140,189 307,282,963 305,129,754 305,828,141 244,999,610 306,795,489 303,063,792 299,562,403 324,597,843 323,228,031 330,385,212 325,014,923

17. Interest Expense 255,072,199 263,426,541 290,680,212 311,144,266 347,299,596 383,858,485 404,476,696 432,250,885 451,626,012 441,968,271 442,805,209 447,662,603 440,879,370 439,733,160

18. Non-Permanently Financed Capital Debt 22,612,653 92,007,953 65,723,450 65,723,450 65,723,450 65,723,450 65,723,450 65,723,450 65,723,450 65,723,450 65,723,450 65,723,450 65,723,450 65,723,450

19. OMERS 2 (83,774,355) (27,843,993) 21,016,540

20. Allocated 2012-14 Labour-related amounts and Unallocated amounts 3 80,680,547 25,638,124 59,779,458 86,630,000

21. School Authorities 4 41,312,326 43,358,410 46,075,492 44,672,968 49,229,221 49,323,217 50,638,209 26,631,021 28,230,578 28,097,103 29,096,901 29,490,825 30,563,947 32,092,144

TOTAL FUNDING EXCLUDING CAPITAL PROGRAMS BELOW $ 14,398,983,958 $ 15,234,342,955 $ 15,901,543,101 $ 16,622,696,351 $ 17,141,352,155 $ 18,056,628,557 $ 18,892,240,258 $ 19,537,108,480 $ 20,270,605,017 $ 20,985,162,935 $ 20,967,365,758 $ 20,768,115,379 $ 22,449,012,459 $ 22,458,875,756

Average Utilization of School Facilities, 2014-15 7 Enrolment (Average Daily Enrolment of Pupils of the Board)

Elementary Secondary 2002-03Actuals

2003-04 Actuals

2004-05Actuals

2005-06Actuals

2006-07Actuals

2007-08Actuals

2008-09 Actuals

2009-10 Actuals

2010-11Actuals

2011-12 Actuals

2012-13 Actuals

2013-14 Actuals

2014-15 Revised Estimates

2015-16Projections

Number of School Facilities 3,978 924 Elementary 1,323,942 1,316,404 1,300,674 1,286,401 1,264,051 1,248,001 1,230,694 1,218,511 1,213,881 1,213,880 1,214,567 1,219,574 1,356,700 1,357,636 Enrolment 1,356,700 606,850 Secondary 673,537 650,166 663,309 672,999 679,980 682,933 682,537 683,693 676,709 664,640 649,178 624,644 606,850 602,520 Capacity 1,570,904 762,353 Total 1,997,479 1,966,570 1,963,983 1,959,400 1,944,030 1,930,934 1,913,231 1,902,203 1,890,589 1,878,520 1,863,745 1,844,218 1,963,550 1,960,156 Average Utilization 86.4% 79.6% School Authorities 2,096 2,052 2,031 1,895 1,792 1,762 1,683 1,082 1,096 1,086 1,089 1,084 1,156 1,156

Capital Investment EXPENDITURES FROM 2002-03 TO 2014-15

CAPITAL PROGRAMS Allocated Unallocated2002-03Actuals

2003-04 Actuals

2004-05Actuals

2005-06Actuals

2006-07Actuals

2007-08Actuals

2008-09 Actuals

2009-10 Actuals

2010-11Actuals

2011-12Actuals

2012-13 Actuals

2013-14 Actuals


New Pupil Places and Other Capital Programs 5 8,731,388,060 5,740,399 670,801,830 906,652,673 916,814,830 772,275,527 970,956,021 761,557,635 880,429,756 796,844,320 656,766,720 554,484,402 334,935,940 154,162,600 103,361,685 320,462,876

Full-Day Kindergarten 1,510,907,603 23,955,226 63,274,238 256,487,327 348,902,812 445,033,317 273,571,656 99,845,793

Good Places to Learn Renewal (GPL) 2,315,176,235 169,872,990 518,069,872 473,081,353 333,133,414 307,408,682 231,882,043 167,960,341 105,773,241 14,549,645 - 650,096 10,279,305

New Capital Funding 6 3,544,010,869 226,953,217 216,460,305 426,928,432 533,413,038 866,063,245 1,501,145,849

Total 16,101,482,767 232,693,616 670,801,830 906,652,673 1,086,687,820 1,290,345,399 1,444,037,374 1,094,691,049 1,187,838,438 1,052,681,589 888,001,299 1,133,205,275 1,125,316,829 1,132,608,955 1,243,646,682

Notes: Totals may not add due to rounding. 1 Funding through these allocations from 2002-03 to 2005-06 is not always comparable to the succeeding years because of grant realignments and the introduction, elimination and consolidation of various grants. 2 OMERS (Ontario Municipal Employees Retirement System) reflects a funding recovery in 2002-03 and 2003-04 due to a pension contribution holiday. It also reflects a retroactive payment in 2010-11 to support a contribution increase effective January 2011.

In subsequent years, funding for the contribution rate increase is being flowed to school boards through increases to benefits-related benchmarks.3 Includes funding agreed to through the Implementation Cost Estimate (ICE) Working Group which has been allocated by board (2012-13 and 2013-14), as well as other funding that has yet to be allocated to individual boards (2014-15 and 2015-16).4 In September 2009, twenty School Authorities were amalgamated with the local district school boards and the funding for these amalgamated boards is reflected in the grants lines of the receiving boards.5 Other Capital Programs include: Primary Class Size, Prohibitive to Repair, Growth Schools, French-Language Capital Transitional Adjustment, Capital Priorities, Green Schools Pilot Initiative and 2010-11 Temporary Accommodation.6 New Capital Funding includes: Capital Priorities Grant funding, Land Funding to Support Capital Priorities, the School Condition Improvement Allocation, Temporary Accommodation allocations (starting in 2011-12), the Retrofitting of School Space for Child care and the School Consolidation Capital.7 Across 72 school boards, the lowest average utilization for a single board is 30% and the highest average utilization is 102%.

Projected Remaining as of

Aug. 31, 2015

143

March 2015

Projected School Board Funding for the 2015-16 School Year(46) Halton Catholic DSB

Grants for Operating and Other Purposes 1 2002-03 Actuals

2003-04 Actuals

2004-05 Actuals

2005-06 Actuals

2006-07 Actuals

2007-08 Actuals

2008-09 Actuals

2009-10 Actuals

2010-11 Actuals

2011-12 Actuals

2012-13 Actuals 2013-14 Actuals 2014-15 Revised

Estimates2015-16

Projections

1. Pupil Foundation Grant 98,327,916 102,863,750 110,683,461 119,461,506 114,108,831 121,392,269 129,020,199 135,044,658 140,615,929 147,659,304 150,274,385 150,713,027 168,795,687 172,946,563

2. School Foundation Grant 13,299,029 14,845,063 15,993,247 16,966,809 17,609,671 18,471,401 18,741,068 19,171,961 20,698,568 21,019,338

3. Special Education Grant 17,975,491 21,071,643 19,428,654 22,742,576 24,390,671 26,061,030 27,283,944 28,500,448 30,007,005 33,487,906 34,235,514 34,978,802 39,748,482 40,678,088

4. Language Grant 3,364,913 3,646,469 3,959,465 4,187,923 4,528,912 4,596,516 4,933,371 5,018,906 5,370,890 6,012,500 6,189,702 6,453,129 6,838,873 6,948,135

5. First Nations, Métis, and Inuit Education Supplement 31,249 47,322 92,453 296,353 211,609 228,471 153,034 237,639 240,141

6. Geographic Circumstances Grant - 39,051 39,051 44,051 - - - - - - - - - -

7. Learning Opportunities Grant 1,590,497 2,132,826 2,277,854 2,188,415 1,189,122 1,260,825 1,355,753 1,463,960 1,996,619 2,177,374 2,337,853 2,325,398 2,539,683 2,580,661

8. Safe and Accepting Schools Supplement 406,302 424,574 437,609 463,041 472,395 478,556 515,504 527,390

9. Program Enhancement Grant 352,500 463,200 472,850 472,850 482,500

10. Continuing Education and Other Programs Grant 1,060,255 1,066,322 1,127,824 1,313,868 1,337,146 1,414,566 1,634,796 1,875,655 1,731,937 1,791,414 1,905,074 2,166,661 2,129,643 2,181,740

11. Cost Adjustment and Teacher Qualifications and Experience Grant 4,795,436 4,776,658 6,681,122 5,473,599 7,266,445 9,263,719 11,727,167 13,786,603 16,945,995 19,471,623 19,360,089 20,246,331 24,883,590 25,632,475

12. Student Transportation Grant 4,453,738 4,686,824 4,778,795 5,125,902 5,267,434 5,474,198 5,712,615 5,899,632 5,936,554 6,127,259 6,099,616 6,723,386 6,785,073 7,072,939

13. Declining Enrolment Adjustment - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

14. School Board Administration and Governance Grant 5,539,804 5,745,194 6,081,904 6,387,846 6,594,064 6,795,823 7,116,604 7,424,363 7,472,208 7,683,774 7,712,009 7,817,479 8,462,414 8,579,127

15. School Operations Allocation 16,238,338 16,710,097 18,309,007 19,630,975 20,285,610 21,343,796 22,701,098 24,500,585 24,710,567 25,708,268 26,316,953 27,428,692 29,860,333 30,603,167

16. School Renewal Allocation (excluding GPL) 2,563,649 2,693,625 2,935,816 2,919,067 2,946,509 2,995,741 2,446,777 3,159,640 3,105,916 3,118,292 3,402,023 3,489,239 3,731,280 3,761,999

17. Interest Expense 11,935,986 11,719,526 11,182,391 10,350,975 9,995,265 11,088,772 11,441,595 12,435,878 11,507,935 10,062,695 10,031,068 9,773,530 9,891,988 10,141,837

18. Non-Permanently Financed Capital Debt 15,792 66,321 47,375 47,375 47,375 47,375 47,375 47,375 47,375 47,375 47,375 47,375 47,375 47,375

19. OMERS 2 (789,754) (289,429) 281,023

20. Allocated 2012-14 Labour-related amounts and Unallocated amounts 3 80,265 330,766

TOTAL FUNDING EXCLUDING CAPITAL PROGRAMS BELOW $ 167,072,061 $ 176,928,876 $ 187,532,719 $ 199,874,079 $ 211,256,413 $ 226,963,442 $ 242,331,365 $ 257,114,389 $ 268,546,436 $ 282,976,334 $ 287,433,860 $ 292,297,367 $ 325,166,131 $ 332,960,974

Average Utilization of School Facilities, 2014-15 6 Enrolment (Average Daily Enrolment of Pupils of the Board)

Elementary Secondary 2002-03Actuals

2003-04 Actuals

2004-05Actuals

2005-06Actuals

2006-07Actuals

2007-08Actuals

2008-09 Actuals

2009-10 Actuals

2010-11Actuals

2011-12 Actuals

2012-13 Actuals

2013-14 Actuals


2015-16Projections

Number of School Facilities 45 10 Elementary 16,836 17,187 17,539 17,704 17,614 17,646 17,692 17,817 17,922 18,214 18,459 18,959 21,714 22,125 Enrolment 21,714 9,870 Secondary 7,533 7,644 8,230 8,795 9,109 9,312 9,520 9,779 9,809 9,890 10,007 9,923 9,870 10,247 Capacity 22,113 11,103 Total 24,369 24,830 25,768 26,499 26,724 26,958 27,212 27,596 27,731 28,103 28,466 28,882 31,584 32,372 Average Utilization 98.2% 88.9%

EXPENDITURES FROM 2002-03 TO 2014-15

CAPITAL PROGRAMS2002-03Actuals

2003-04 Actuals

2004-05Actuals

2005-06Actuals

2006-07Actuals

2007-08Actuals

2008-09 Actuals

2009-10 Actuals

2010-11Actuals

2011-12Actuals

2012-13 Actuals

2013-14 Actuals


New Pupil Places and Other Capital Programs 4 4,679,488 13,011,309 5,003,450 9,857,569 32,665,442 23,729,839 25,217,275 25,072,252 26,625,051 8,592,427 15,208,802 52,916 - 20,706,310

Full-Day Kindergarten 170,708 3,269,766 1,931,149 1,948,474 6,953,656 5,345,000 728,396

Good Places to Learn Renewal (GPL) - 1,048,385 146,897 498 799,841 1,772,253 423,290 87,463 - - - -

New Capital Funding 5 11,834,909 11,143,816 19,995,969 2,600,000 17,765,263

Total 4,679,488 13,011,309 5,003,450 10,905,954 32,812,339 23,730,337 26,017,116 27,015,213 30,318,107 22,445,948 28,301,092 27,002,541 7,945,000

Notes: Totals may not add due to rounding. 1 Funding through these allocations from 2002-03 to 2005-06 is not always comparable to the succeeding years because of grant realignments and the introduction, elimination and consolidation of various grants. 2 OMERS (Ontario Municipal Employees Retirement System) reflects a funding recovery in 2002-03 and 2003-04 due to a pension contribution holiday. It also reflects a retroactive payment in 2010-11 to support a contribution increase effective January 2011.

In subsequent years, funding for the contribution rate increase is being flowed to school boards through increases to benefits-related benchmarks.3 Includes funding agreed to through the Implementation Cost Estimate (ICE) Working Group which has been allocated by board (2012-13 and 2013-14), as well as other funding that has yet to be allocated to individual boards (2014-15 and 2015-16).4 Other Capital Programs include: Primary Class Size, Prohibitive to Repair, Growth Schools, French-Language Capital Transitional Adjustment, Capital Priorities, Green Schools Pilot Initiative and 2010-11 Temporary Accommodation.5 New Capital Funding includes: Capital Priorities Grant funding, Land Funding to Support Capital Priorities, the School Condition Improvement Allocation, Temporary Accommodation allocations (starting in 2011-12), the Retrofitting of School Space for Child care and the School Consolidation Capital.6 Across 72 school boards, the lowest average utilization for a single board is 30% and the highest average utilization is 102%.

Projected Remaining as of

Aug. 31, 2015

144

Date Completed Item Description of Activity

September 9th ADM Memorandum, September 9, 2014 Ministry invitation to Education Funding consultation sessions

October 3rd Provincial Consultation (Regional Symposium) Ministry consultation on 'Education Funding'

November 28th Ministry Memorandum 2014:SB26 District School Board Enrolment Projections for 2015-16 to 2018-19 submitted to the Ministry.

December 8th & 11th ADM Memorandum, November 19, 2014 Financial Orientation Sessions for Trustees

January 15-17th Ministry Information Package Ministry of Education Trustee Orientation: Realizing the Vision

January 23rd CEO/CFO Conference 2015-16 Education Funding Consultations: What We Heard

February 9th Budget Estimates Schedule & Objectives Discuss 2015-16 Budget Estimates Schedule & Objectives at Administrative Council

February 17th Budget Estimates Schedule & Objectives Present 2015-16 Budget Estimates Schedule & Objectives to the Board

February 20th Budget Process Memorandum Distribute the 2015-16 Budget Process Memorandum to Superintendents, Administrators, Managers

February 20th Departmental Budget Reviews Distribute Budget Input Package to Departments (by this date)

March 6th Departmental Budget Reviews Receive Budget Submissions from Departments (by this date)

March 9th Special Education Enveloping Presentation Present Special Education Funding and Enveloping to SEAC

March 13th Departmental Budget Reviews Complete Budget Review Meetings with Departments (by this date)

March 13th Ministry Memorandum 2015:B06 2015-16 Grants for Student Needs (GSN) Launch and Follow-up Sessions with School Boards

March 23rd Budget Update Budget Estimates Update (Administrative Council) / Approval of Program Enhancements

March 26th Ministry Memorandum 2015:B07 Release of Grant for Student Needs (GSN)

March 31st School Budgets Development of School Budgets Based on Forecasted Enrolment

March 31st Salary and Benefits Budget Salary and FTE staffing "snapshot" from HR/Payroll System (base for 2015-16 Budget)

April 7th Budget Update Budget Estimates Update (Administrative Council) / Prioritization of New Initiatives

April 7th Ministry Memorandum 2015:B07 Board Report - Release of Grant for Student Needs (GSN)

April 10th Budget Consultation Budget Communication (Website / School Newsletters / Parish Bulletins)

April 10th Salary and Benefits Budget Send FTE staffing reports to Superintendents for review and confirmation

April 10th Salary and Benefits Budget Complete Review of Benefits Budget (Financial Services and Human Resources)

April 17th Salary and Benefits Budget Receive FTE staffing confirmations

April 20th Budget Update Budget Estimates Update (Administrative Council)

April 21st Budget Consultation Trustee/Senior Staff Information Session - 2015-16 Budget Challenges and Priorities

April 24th Salary and Benefits Budget Complete Salary and Benefits Budget

May 11th Budget Estimates Report (Draft) Budget Estimates Draft Report (Administrative Council)

May 19th Budget Estimates Report (Draft) Present Budget Estimates Draft Report to the Board (Draft #1)

May 25th Budget Consultation Present Special Education Funding / Budget Challenges and Priorities - SEAC

May 25th Budget Estimates Report (Draft) Budget Estimates Draft Report (Administrative Council)

June 2nd Budget Estimates Report (Draft) Present Budget Estimates Draft Report to the Board (Draft #2)

June 8th Budget Estimates Report (Draft) Budget Estimates Draft Report (Administrative Council)

June 16th Budget Estimates Report (Final) Final Budget Estimates Report to the Board for Approval

June 17th Budget Estimates Report (Final) Post Final Budget Report on Public Website

June 26th Ministry Memorandum 2014: B04 Submission of Budget Estimates to the Ministry (EFIS)

June 26th Budget Estimates Report (Final) Submission of Budget Estimates to OCSTA (EFIS)

Halton Catholic District School Board2015-16 Budget Estimates Schedule

Z:\5 - Financial reporting\Budget Estimates\20152016 Estimates\Original Estimates\2015-16 Budget Schedule.xls31/03/2015 12:31 PM

Appendix G

145

Release of the Revised Pupil Accommodation Review Guidelines (Version 3) Page 1 of 4



RELEASE OF THE REVISED PUPIL ACCOMMODATION REVIEW GUIDELINES (VERSION 3)

PURPOSE:

To update the Board on the new Pupil Accommodation Review Guideline (PARG) released by the Ministry of Education on March 26th, 2015, and identify next steps to undertake a review of the Boards’ current closure and consolidation policies and procedures.

BACKGROUND:

The first Pupil Accommodation Review Guideline (Version 1) was introduced in 2006 by the Ministry of Education to provide boards with minimum standards on how to develop their closure and consolidation policies and procedures. PARG was later updated in 2009 (Version 2), introducing additional measures to rate school performances in the lens of ‘value to students’.

In November 2013, the Ministry of Education established a Capital Advisory Committee (CAC), led by Grant Osborn Director of Capital Policy and Programs Branch at the Ministry of Education. The Committee was tasked with coordinating three major projects, listed below, as part of the Ministry’s School Board Efficiency and Modernization (SBEM) program:

1) Pupil Accommodation Review Guidelines (Version #3)

2) Disposition of Surplus Real Property (O. Reg 444/98)

3) Initiatives to encourage Joint Use/Collaboration between School Boards in Capital Projects.

The completion of PARG #3 was the first priority. The primary area of focus in updating the Ministry PARG was to identify ways to reduce the level of contentiousness associated with the undertaking of an Accommodation Review in a community. Contention usually stemmed from the development, assessment, and rating of individual schools using Student Information Profiles (SIP).

The CAC found through their consultation with Boards that SIP criteria presented significant difficulties in consistently measuring and comparing values as the data was more driven by qualitative and subjective measures created by the community.

Another major consideration for the new PARG is the development of new tools that would enhance the level of flexibility in policy and procedural requirements to be more adaptive to specific scenarios, as opposed to a “one-size-fits-all” approach.

166


RELEASE OF THE PUPIL ACCOMMODATION REVIEW GUIDELINES:

On March 26th, 2015 the Ministry provided a video presentation explaining changes to the Grant for Student Needs (GSN), the Ministry’s PARG, and the updated Community Planning and Partnership Guideline (CPPG). Ministry memorandum 2015: B09 dated March 26, 2015, was also released which provided an overview of changes to both (Appendix A). All three announcements are linked to one another, with the objective of increasing school board operational efficiencies and community partnership.

The key highlight to the GSN that relates to closures and consolidations is that the Ministry of Education will be phasing out the “top-up funding” grant over the next three years, no longer funding empty classroom spaces. This should be seen as a strong directive of the Ministry to reduce the amount of underutilized space within Board inventory.

As of October 31st, 2014, the Board has a total of approximately 78 empty elementary classrooms loaded at 23 pupil places, for a total of 1,800 empty pupil places, and approximately 76 empty secondary classrooms loaded at 21 pupil places, for a total of 1,600 empty pupil places. These numbers are anticipated to increase over time in areas under decline (see Appendix B for by-school breakdown).

The key highlights to the new PARG are as follows (full guideline attached as Appendix C):

1. More prescriptive in nature; 2. The format of School Information Profiles (SIP) are refocused to be more quantitative in nature to

facilitate comparison and measurement of facility performance; 3. Requirement for school boards to seek feedback from local municipal governments and

community partners; 4. Direct linkage to the new CPPG, where the Board must provide an annual meeting and information

exchange on accommodation plans, enrolment, partnerships, and future projects; 5. Refocused role of the Accommodation Review Committee (ARC), as a conduit for information

sharing, whereby there is no longer a requirement for the ARC to vote on an option; 6. Changes to the ARC membership; 7. Shorter minimum approval timelines, and the addition of an optional modified pupil accommodate

review process to address local circumstances and provide Board with greater flexibility; a. Normal process: 5 Month minimum, with 2 public meetings b. Modified process: 3 Month minimum, with 1 public meeting

The Ministry’s Facility Partnership Guideline has now been renamed as the Community Planning and Partnerships Guidelines (CPPG), which is meant to support a broader function and objective at a provincial level. The key highlights to the new CPPG are as follows (full guideline attached as Appendix D):

1. Encouragement to exchange more information with public partners, and requirement to hold annual meetings (see point 4 in PARG highlights above); and,

2. Requirement to seek additional information and input from communities on specific facilities when it is anticipated that they may be part of a future accommodation review.

The Ministry has also advised that all Boards are expected to amend their existing school closure/consolidation policies and procedures and facility partnership policy currently in effect to reflect the changes to the PARG and CPPG before announcing any new pupil accommodation reviews. It is also expected that Boards consult with local communities prior to adopting the new policies.

167


NEXT STEPS – AMENDING BOARD POLICIES AND ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES:

With the release of the Ministry’s new PARG and CPPG, the HCDSB will now be required to update its Board Policy and Administrative Procedures as they relate to school accommodation closures/consolidations and facility partnerships, which are as follows:

1. Operating Policy I-9: School Accommodation – Consolidation/Closure (Appendix E)

2. Administrative Procedure VI-35: School Accommodation – Consolidation/Closure (Appendix F)

3. Operating Policy Facility Partnership I-37: Facility Partnership (Appendix G)

To maximize efficiency and reduce timelines, staff have opted to collaborate with the 5 other Catholic School Boards Services Association (CSBSA) boards in the GTA to retain professional legal services to develop a preliminary policy and procedure that reflects the changes made to the PARG, and that can be further adapted to the HCDSB’s specific needs once completed. The CSBSA is also discussing the possibility of collaboratively updating their facility partnership policies to be in line with the new CPPG.

The rational in working through CSBSA can be summarized as follows:

1. CSBSA member Boards are all located in the Greater Toronto (GTA), and share many of the same perspectives as Catholic Boards, therefore goals and context are very comparable;

2. There would significant cost savings in pooling our resources to complete the works, both monetarily and in time;

3. Developing policies and procedures internally would be time consuming; 4. Having 6 boards review the policies and procedures, there is greater opportunity to draw from

the corporate experience in closure and consolidation from all participating members; 5. Being a CSBSA project, it is possible to finance the costs through the special project allocations;

and, 6. Once the project is completed or nearing completion, there is also opportunity to provide the

product to non-CSBSA boards at a nominal cost, further opening cost-recovery options. 7. Three CSBSA members that will be working on this project currently sit on the CAC. These

members come from the Durham Catholic District School Board (DCDSB) the York Catholic District School Board (YCDSB) and the Toronto Catholic District School Board (TCDSB). This provides additional advantages to partnering, as these members will have expert knowledge on the new PARG.

At this time, the work proposal has been drafted, and will be forwarded to a preferred legal counsel. The preferred legal counsel has not been selected, but the CSBSA Planning Committee has shortlisted prospects that have the most experience in the GTA in closure and consolidation processes. Once identified, this will be announced to the Board as an information item and follow up to the aforementioned Board report.

The scope of work provided to the selection legal firm will be as follows:

1. Review the revised PARG as issued by the Ministry of Education and Memorandum 2015: B9 that relate to the Accommodation Review Guidelines;

2. Develop a generic draft policy for both the regular and accelerated Pupil Accommodation Review that reflects the new PARG; and,

3. Develop generic draft administrative procedure (s) for both the regular and modified Pupil Accommodation Review that reflects the new guideline;

168


The deliverables submitted by the successful firm will be as follows (note that all deliverables will become the property of the CSBSA):

1. Draft generic policy for use by the CSBSA;

2. Draft generic procedure(s) for use by the CSBSA;

3. Comparison document to existing policies for each Board

4. Advice to each Board in adopting the Policy and Procedure

It is anticipated that the final draft would be made available to each CSBSA Board three (3) weeks after the contract has been awarded. From there, the following steps would be undertaken to complete the process of updating the Board’s Closure and Consolidation Policies and Procedures:

Milestones: CSBSA Review of draft policy and procedure April/May, 2015 Policy Committee: First review of draft policy and procedure May 12, 2015 Policy Committee: Second review of draft policy and procedure June 9, 2015 Regular Board Meeting: Board Approval of new policy June 16, 2015

To further inform the drafted policies and procedures, CSBSA may also reach out to other Boards that are part of the Ontario Association of School Board Officials (OASBO) to further draw upon past experiences and inform the development of a better policy and procedure for participating boards.

CONCLUSION:

Once the Board’s Closure and Consolidation Policy and Procedures are updated and approved by the Board, Business Services and Facility Services will commence the identification of potential projects within our Board.

An action plan outlining these projects will be presented to the Board in the 2015-2016 school year with supporting rational, with the goal of starting Accommodation Review Processes during the next school year and capitalize on the remaining balance of the Ministry’s School Consolidation Capital allocation.

REPORT PREPARED BY: F. THIBEAULT ADMINISTRATOR OF PLANNING SERVICES REPORT SUBMITTED BY: P. MCMAHON


169


Office of the Assistant Deputy Minister

Financial Policy and Business Division 20th Floor, Mowat Block Queen’s Park Toronto ON M7A 1L2

Ministère de l’Éducation

Bureau du sous-ministre adjoint

Division des politiques financières et des opérations 20e étage, édifice Mowat Queen’s Park Toronto ON M7A 1L2

2015: B09

Memorandum To: Directors of Education

From: Gabriel F. Sékaly Assistant Deputy Minister Financial Policy and Business Division


Subject: Release of New Pupil Accommodation Review Guideline and Community Planning and Partnerships Guideline

I am writing to advise you of the release of the new Pupil Accommodation Review Guideline (PARG) (see Appendix A) as well as the revised Facility Partnerships Guideline (now known as the Community Planning and Partnerships Guideline (CPPG)) (see Appendix B), and to provide you with details of the changes to these guidelines.

In 2014-15, the Ministry of Education introduced the School Board Efficiencies and Modernization (SBEM) strategy to provide incentives and supports for school boards to make more efficient use of school space. One of the elements of the strategy was to revise the PARG to allow school boards to have a more effective tool to address their needs to close and consolidate facilities, while continuing to ensure that communities have the opportunity to provide meaningful input.

The Ministry of Education is also revising the Community Planning and Partnerships Guideline to align and more closely link with the new PARG. Changes have been made to both guidelines to enhance opportunities for school boards to work more closely with local municipal governments and other community partners when planning to address their underutilized school space, and more generally to require greater coordination and sharing of planning related information between school boards and other community partners.

The PARG and CPPG continue to represent a framework of minimum standards for school boards to meet in developing their pupil accommodation review and facility partnerships policies. School boards are expected to amend their existing pupil accommodation review and facility partnerships policies to reflect the changes incorporated into the new PARG and CPPG before announcing any new pupil

Appendix A

170

accommodation reviews. The Ministry of Education expects school boards to consult with local communities prior to adopting or subsequently amending these policies.

The new PARG and CPPG are effective upon release and replace the previous versions dated June 26, 2009 and February 11, 2010, respectively.

A. New Pupil Accommodation Review Guideline (PARG)

Since the PARG was last updated in 2009, the Ministry of Education and school boards have received a significant amount of feedback about the effectiveness of the existing PARG for school boards, parents and guardians, and other community members. Among the feedback received about the existing PARG were concerns about the contentiousness of the existing process for members of the accommodation review committee (ARC), the inflexibility of the existing process with its “one size fits all” approach to all accommodation reviews, the length of the existing process, the lack of a formal role for municipal representatives, and the fact that trustees do not always make decisions that reflect the reports of the ARC.

To address many of the concerns noted above, the Ministry of Education’s Capital Advisory Committee (CAC), consisting of 15 school board representatives from across the province, undertook a comprehensive review of the existing PARG. This review, which began in early 2014, was also intended to ensure that school boards have an effective tool to support the SBEM strategy of addressing underutilized space. The CAC then provided recommendations on potential PARG revisions to the Ministry of Education for further consideration.

In late 2014 and early 2015, the Ministry of Education consulted on the CAC’s recommendations with stakeholders, including trustee associations, senior school board officials, parent groups, student associations, teacher federations, education worker unions, municipal sector representatives, and administrative review facilitators.

The Ministry of Education has incorporated the CAC’s recommendations and the feedback from the consultations into the new PARG. As a result, the PARG has undergone a significant transformation. School boards should ensure that they review the new PARG carefully before examining how to amend their local pupil accommodation review policies.

B. Highlights of the New PARG

1. Requirements for School Boards to Consult with Municipal Governments and Other Community Partners on Underutilized Space:

The PARG includes a requirement for school boards to seek feedback from their local municipal governments and other community partners on capital and accommodation planning related to addressing underutilized space. The PARG outlines consultation with local municipal governments and other community partners after the pupil accommodation review process has commenced. (Note that

171

the CPPG includes requirements for school boards to reach out to municipalities and other community partners on an annual basis as part of the regular planning cycle, and when school boards are beginning to review underutilized space in schools in specific areas of the school board.)

2. Changes to the Accommodation Review Committee Structure:

a) Role:

The role of the ARC has been refocused as a conduit for information sharing between the school board and the school communities. At a minimum, the ARC will provide feedback on the initial staff report option(s). The ARC may provide other options, however, it must include a supporting rationale for any such option. ARC members do not need to have a unanimous opinion regarding the information provided to the Board of Trustees.

b) Membership:

The ARC membership, at a minimum, should include parent/guardian representatives from the school(s) under review. Where established by a school board’s pupil accommodation review policy, there may also be the option to include students and representation from the broader community. In addition, school board trustees may serve as ad hoc ARC members.

3. Changes to Timelines for the Accommodation Review Process:

a) Standard Accommodation Review Process:

The standard pupil accommodation review process requires school boards to hold a minimum of two public meetings over a minimum five month period. The new PARG lists minimum requirements for the first public meeting.

b) Optional Modified Accommodation Review Process:

The optional modified pupil accommodation review process requires school boards to hold a minimum of one public meeting over a minimum three month period. As with the standard process, the new PARG lists minimum requirements for the first public meeting.

4. Changes to School Board Staff Reporting Requirements:

Initial and final staff reports, respectively, must be presented by school board staff to the Board of Trustees prior to, and immediately after, a pupil accommodation review.

a) Initial Staff Report to Board of Trustees:

An initial staff report must be presented before a pupil accommodation review can be undertaken. The initial staff report must contain one or more options, including a recommended option, with supporting rationale for each option. Furthermore, the initial staff report must also include information on actions taken by school board staff prior to establishing a pupil accommodation review process.

172

b) Final Staff Report to Board of Trustees:

The final staff report must contain a Community Consultation section that contains feedback from the ARC and any public consultations as well as any relevant information obtained from municipalities and other community partners prior to and during the pupil accommodation review.

5. Introduction of Transition Plan Requirement:

Following the decision to consolidate and/or close a school, a transition plan should be developed in consultation with parents/guardians and staff.

6. Introduction of Optional Modified Accommodation Review Process:

An optional modified pupil accommodation review process has been introduced in the new PARG for school boards to address local circumstances. For a school board to adopt a modified pupil accommodation review process as part of its pupil accommodation review policy, the school board must identify explicitly the factors that need to be met before a modified process can be initiated. The new PARG lists the factors for school boards to consider in their pupil accommodation review policies for a modified process. At least two of these factors must be incorporated as part of the conditions that must be met before a school board can initiate a modified pupil accommodation review process. School boards can also include factors beyond those listed in the new PARG.

A school board must consult with its community on the factors that could trigger a modified pupil accommodation review process before these factors are adopted as part of the school board’s pupil accommodation review policy. A school board may still choose to use the standard pupil accommodation review process even if the conditions for the use of a modified process, based on the school board’s pupil accommodation review policy, are satisfied.

The optional modified pupil accommodation review process requires a minimum of one public meeting, and does not include the need to form an ARC.

7. Introduction of Additional Exemptions:

Two new exemptions have been added to the new PARG for specific circumstances where school boards are not obligated to undertake a pupil accommodation review.

a) Where a replacement school is to be built by the school board on the existing site, or built or acquired within the existing school attendance boundary and the school community must be temporarily relocated to ensure the safety of students and staff during the reconstruction, as identified through the school board’s policy.

b) Where there are no students enrolled at the school at any time throughout the school year.

173

8. Other Changes:

a) School Information Profiles (SIPs):

The SIP minimum data requirements and factors have been refocused to the measureable data within the school boards’ areas of expertise.

As school boards integrate the changes to the new PARG into their pupil accommodation review policies, it is important to note that the Ministry encourages school boards not to make final pupil accommodation review decisions during the summer holiday period.

C. Revised Community Planning and Partnerships Guideline (CPPG) (formerly the Facility Partnerships Guideline)

As a result of the consultation feedback on the new PARG, the Ministry of Education is building in a more formal consultation between school boards and municipal governments and other community partners in the planning process around underutilized school space, as well as green space/parkland. These changes are being made to help ensure that municipalities and other community partners are made more aware of a school board’s plans and available school space on a regular basis, and well before a school is considered for inclusion in a pupil accommodation review.

The Ministry of Education’s 2014 mandate letter acknowledged that it will be engaging stakeholders in the near future on community hubs, in cooperation with other ministries in this area, to promote efficient use of public assets, build better ties between schools and municipalities and other community organizations, and ensure more viable schools are able to remain open. As a result, further revisions to the CPPG may be introduced as the government reviews its policies towards supporting community hubs.

D. Highlights of the CPPG Revisions

1) The Facility Partnerships Guideline has been re-named the Community Planning and Partnerships Guideline (CPPG) to reflect that in addition to encouraging facility partnerships, the guideline also supports effective planning with community partners, including land use and green space/park planning.

2) At a minimum, all levels of municipal government, District Social Services Administration Boards (DSSABs), Consolidated Municipal Service Managers (CMSMs), public health boards, Local Health Integration Networks (LHINs), and children’s mental health centres must be on school boards’ notification list when key information regarding facility partnerships or planning is changed or updated.

3) At a minimum, on an annual basis, the sharing of planning information between school boards and other community partners must take place at a public meeting.

174

a) In addition to this meeting, school boards and other community partners have the option to meet at a staff-level to discuss potential partnership and planning opportunities.

b) The type of information to be shared at this meeting by both school boards and community partners, and the documentation of exchanged information by school boards has been specified.

4) In addition to the annual meeting, school boards should continue discussions with affected municipalities and other community organizations as they explore options to address underutilized space issues in schools within specific areas of their school board. These discussions will inform proposals that school board staff may present to the Board of Trustees, including recommendations to undertake a pupil accommodation review process.

As part of these discussions with community organizations, school boards should obtain a clear indication of any community planning and partnership opportunities in areas where a pupil accommodation review may take place. Additionally, school boards are to request technical information from the local municipality or municipalities where a planned pupil accommodation review may occur. This technical information is to be specified by the school board and can include, but is not limited to, population and future development projections in the area.

The Pupil Accommodation Review Guideline provides a full description of the pupil accommodation review process that school boards are required to undertake prior to making a pupil accommodation review decision.

E. Transition

The Ministry of Education recognizes that some school boards may have begun pupil accommodation reviews (i.e., consultation process is substantially underway or completed) or facility partnerships talks prior to the release of the new PARG and CPPG. Pupil accommodation reviews and facility partnerships that are currently announced or underway should proceed based on the school board’s existing policies. Furthermore, school boards should not review previous ARC processes or decisions based on the new PARG.

School boards are expected to amend their existing pupil accommodation review and facility partnerships policies to reflect the changes incorporated into the new PARG and CPPG before announcing any new pupil accommodation reviews.

Training and support materials for school boards are anticipated to be developed to assist with them with the implementation of the new PARG and CPPG. Details regarding these materials will be announced later this year.

F. Ministry Contacts

The Ministry of Education wishes to thank the members of the CAC for their

175

contributions towards the development of the new PARG. The Ministry of Education will continue to work with school boards regarding the best use of space in schools.

If you have any questions regarding the new PARG and the CPPG, please contact Grant Osborn at 416-325-1705 or [email protected], or Mathew Thomas at 416-326-9920 or [email protected].

Original signed by

Gabriel F. Sékaly Assistant Deputy Minister Financial Policy and Business Division

Attachments: Appendix A: Pupil Accommodation Review Guideline, March 2015 Appendix B: Community Planning and Partnerships Guideline, March 2015

Copy: Superintendents of Business Superintendents of Planning

176



ESTIMATED CLASSROOM ACCOMMODATIONS Revised 31/03/2015

Z:\4 - Administrative Assistant\Board, Admin, Policy Meetings\Board Reports\2014-2015\15-04-07\10.X PARG Update\Proposed Classroom Accommodations list

SCHOOL FBC SAC Enrolment 2014/2015

Projected Enrolment 2015/2016




FI Classrooms in School Building

SAC Cls Req'd 2014/15

Portables 2014/15

Empty Rooms 2014/15

Comments

BURLINGTON Assumption

Ascension 360 283 271 264 259 252 17 13 4Holy Rosary (B) 455 420 408 414 408 406 20 19 1St. John (B) 383 302 298 304 310 306 17 14 3St. Patrick 337 238 235 232 238 240 15 11 4St. Paul 337 279 264 260 245 241 15 12 3St. Raphael 314 270 253 245 233 230 15 13 2

Assumption Total 2186 1792 1729 1719 1693 1675 99 82 0 17

Corpus ChristiSacred Heart of Jesus 547 509 508 512 523 522 ** 24 22 2St. Anne 622 596 639 681 739 794 28 27 1St. Christopher 478 507 467 444 405 380 21 21St. Elizabeth Seton 455 446 447 454 453 451 20 19 0 1

Corpus Christi Total 2102 2058 2061 2091 2120 2147 93 89 0 4

Notre Dame

Canadian Martyrs 409 344 346 354 348 354 18 16 2St. Gabriel 524 599 596 589 580 590 * 23 25 3 St. Mark 478 336 325 328 329 331 21 15 6St. Timothy 504 515 496 491 465 454 22 21 0 1

Notre Dame Total 1915 1794 1763 1762 1722 1729 84 77 3 9Burlington Total 6203 5644 5553 5572 5535 5551 276 248 3 30HALTON HILLS

Christ the KingHoly Cross 444 447 420 395 381 372 * 19 20St. Brigid 550 668 698 703 709 698 ** 25 30 5St. Catherine of Alexandria 622 828 856 881 904 891 27 36 9St. Francis of Assisi 363 371 358 366 364 362 14 15 2St. Joseph (A) 363 441 422 418 401 380 16 20 4

Christ the King Total 2342 2755 2754 2763 2759 2703 101 121 20 0MILTON

Bishop RedingHoly Rosary (M) 383 335 344 381 418 420 * 23 16Our Lady of Victory 291 220 243 263 309 324 13 10 0 3St. Anthony of Padua 723 863 955 1014 1059 1077 32 36 4St. Peter 619 780 807 846 872 910 ** 27 34 7

Bishop Reding Total 2016 2198 2349 2504 2658 2731 95 96 11 3Jean Vanier

Guardian Angels 723 907 911 899 904 904 32 39 7Lumen Christi 648 541 617 679 748 825 28 23 0 5Our Lady of Fatima 648 865 880 864 842 861 * 28 39 11Queen of Heaven 671 654 703 743 811 911 29 28 1St. Benedict 671 384 494 581 828 1002 *** 29 15 14

Jean Vanier Total 3361 3351 3605 3766 4133 4503 146 144 18 20Milton Total 5377 5549 5954 6270 6791 7234 241 240 29 23

APPENDIX B

177

ESTIMATED CLASSROOM ACCOMMODATIONS Revised 31/03/2015

Z:\4 - Administrative Assistant\Board, Admin, Policy Meetings\Board Reports\2014-2015\15-04-07\10.X PARG Update\Proposed Classroom Accommodations list

SCHOOL FBC SAC Enrolment 2014/2015






SAC Cls Req'd 2014/15

Portables 2014/15

Empty Rooms 2014/15

Comments

OAKVILLE Holy TrinityOur Lady of Peace 478 447 423 413 407 408 21 19 2 St. Andrew 573 789 829 897 913 945 25 33 8St. John (O) 245 189 175 163 160 152 12 9 3St. Marguerite d’Youville 504 593 589 571 550 544 * 22 25 3St. Michael 268 205 196 191 182 176 12 10 2

Holy Trinity Total 2068 2223 2212 2235 2212 2225 92 96 11 7LoyolaMother Teresa 547 531 517 499 472 460 24 22 2St. John Paul II 570 793 799 818 812 824 25 34 9St. Bernadette 504 542 565 550 560 539 * 22 23 1St. Joan of Arc 547 566 551 521 500 491 24 24 St. Matthew 363 437 418 434 437 435 * 16 19 3

Loyola Total 2531 2869 2850 2822 2781 2749 111 122 13 2St. ThomasHoly Family 291 237 216 205 198 194 14 11 3St. Dominic 527 612 621 617 610 619 23 25 2St. James 429 232 217 217 219 219 20 12 8St. Joseph (O) 268 393 378 377 361 346 * 12 18 6St. Luke 360 265 260 248 231 225 16 13 3St. Mary 599 609 852 1103 1309 1497 ** 27 25 2St. Vincent 268 306 276 263 248 230 12 14 2

St. Thomas Total 2742 2654 2820 3030 3176 3330 124 118 10 16

Oakville Total 7341 7746 7882 8087 8169 8304 327 336 34 25

Elementary Total 21263 21694 22143 22692 23254 23792 945 945 86 78

SECONDARY SCHOOLS AND ADULT LEARNING CENTRES

FBC 22:1

Projected ADE 2014/2015






Assumption 955 897 899 806 786 758 43 40 3Corpus Christi 1250 978 943 908 880 906 56 44 12Notre Dame 1175 995 1016 966 967 948 * 52 43 9Christ the King 1448 1541 1534 1555 1569 1611 * 65 69 7Bishop Reding 977 1246 1367 1423 1492 1580 * 44 56 15Jean Vanier 1448 884 941 1038 1157 1249 65 39 26Holy Trinity 1338 1253 1269 1220 1162 1130 * 60 55 0 5St. Ignatius of Loyola 1382 1089 1102 1118 1143 1152 * 62 48 14St. Thomas Aquinas 1294 1154 1300 1390 1488 1457 * 58 51 7A.L.C. - Burlington A.L.C. - Milton

A.L.C. - Oakville 215 215 215 215 215 215Secondary Total 11482 10252 10586 10639 10859 11006 505 445 22 76

TOTAL 32745 31946 32729 33331 34113 34798 1450 1390 108 1544

Maintenance-Holy Trinity (Bd owned) 1Maintenance-Our Lady of Victory (Bd owned) 1

Board Office/CEC 802 Drury

178

MINISTRY OF EDUCATION

PUPIL ACCOMMODATION REVIEW GUIDELINE

March 2015

Appendix C

179

TABLE OF CONTENTS

PREAMBLE

I. PURPOSE II. INTRODUCTION III. GUIDING PRINCIPLES IV. SCHOOL BOARD ACCOMMODATION REVIEW POLICIES V. SCHOOL BOARD PLANNING PRIOR TO AN

ACCOMMODATION REVIEW VI. ESTABLISHING AN ACCOMMODATION REVIEW VII. THE ACCOMMODATION REVIEW COMMITTEE VIII. SCHOOL INFORMATION PROFILE IX. CONSULTATION WITH LOCAL MUNICIPAL GOVERNMENTS X. PUBLIC MEETINGS XI. COMPLETING THE ACCOMODATION REVIEW XII. TRANSITION PLANNING XIII. TIMELINES FOR THE ACCOMMODATION REVIEW PROCESS XIV. MODIFIED ACCOMMODATION REVIEW PROCESS XV. EXEMPTIONS XVI. DEFINITIONS

180

PREAMBLE

School boards are responsible for managing their school capital assets in an effective manner. They must respond to changing demographics and program needs while ensuring continued student achievement and well-being, and the financial viability/sustainability of the school board.

One aspect of a school board’s capital and accommodation planning is reviewing schools that have underutilized space. These are schools where the student capacity of the school is greater than the number of students enrolled. When a school board identifies a school that is projected to have long-term excess space, a school board would typically look at a number of options such as:

• moving attendance boundaries and programs to balance enrolment between over and underutilized schools;

• offering to lease underutilized space within a school to a coterminous school board;

• finding community partners who can pay the full cost of operating the underutilized space; and/or

• decommissioning or demolishing a section of the school that is not required for student use to reduce operating costs.

If none of these options are deemed viable by a school board, the board may determine that a pupil accommodation review process take place which could lead to possible school consolidations and closures. These decisions are made within the context of supporting the school board’s student achievement and well-being strategy and to make the most effective use of its school buildings and funding.

The Ministry of Education expects school boards to work with their community partners when undertaking capital planning, including when a school board is beginning to develop options to address underutilized space in schools. The Ministry of Education’s Community Planning and Partnerships Guideline (CPPG) outlines requirements for school boards to reach out to their local municipalities and other community partners to share planning related information and to explore potential partnership opportunities. This version of the Pupil Accommodation Review Guideline (the “Guideline”) builds upon the CPPG by providing requirements for school boards to share information with and seek feedback from their local municipalities and other community partners related to any pupil accommodation reviews a school board initiates.

If a pupil accommodation review results in a school closure decision, a school board will then need to decide whether to declare that school as surplus, potentially leading to the future sale of the property. These sales are governed by provincial regulation. Alternately, a school board may decide to use a closed school for other school board purposes, or hold the property as a strategic long-term asset of the school board due to a projected need for the facility in the

181

future. Each school board decides when it is appropriate to review its strategic property holdings to determine if these properties are still required to be held or should be considered surplus to the school board’s needs and considered for a future sale.

This document provides direction to school boards on one component of their capital planning - the pupil accommodation review process. It provides the minimum standards the province requires school boards to follow when undertaking a pupil accommodation review. It is important to note that school boards have flexibility to modify their pupil accommodation review policies to meet their local needs, and can develop policies that exceed the provincial minimum standards outlined in this document.

I. PURPOSE

The purpose of the Guideline is to provide a framework of minimum standards for school boards to undertake pupil accommodation reviews to determine the future of a school or group of schools. This Guideline ensures that where a decision is taken by a school board regarding the future of a school, that decision is made with the involvement of an informed local community and is based on a broad range of criteria regarding the quality of the learning experience for students.

This Guideline is effective upon release and replaces the previous Guideline of June 2009.

II. INTRODUCTION

Ontario’s school boards are responsible for deciding the most appropriate pupil accommodation arrangements for the delivery of their elementary and secondary programs. These decisions are made by school board trustees in the context of carrying out their primary responsibilities of fostering student achievement and well-being, and ensuring effective stewardship of school board resources. In some cases, to address changing student populations, this requires school boards to consider undertaking pupil accommodation reviews that may lead to school consolidations and closures.

Under paragraph 26, subsection 8 (1) of the Education Act, the Minister of Education may issue guidelines with respect to school boards’ school closure policies.

III. GUIDING PRINCIPLES

The Guideline has been established to align with the Ministry of Education’s vision and as such, focuses on student well-being; academic achievement; and school board financial viability/sustainability.

182

All school board pupil accommodation review policies should be designed to align with these guiding principles.

IV. SCHOOL BOARD ACCOMMODATION REVIEW POLICIES

School boards are responsible for creating and implementing a policy to address pupil accommodation reviews to serve their local needs. The Ministry of Education expects school boards to consult with local communities prior to adopting or subsequently amending their pupil accommodation review policies.

All pupil accommodation review policies must be clear in stipulating that the final decision regarding the future of a school or group of schools rests solely with the Board of Trustees. If the Board of Trustees votes to close a school or schools in accordance with their policy, the school board must provide clear timelines regarding the closure(s) and ensure that a transition plan is communicated to all affected school communities within the school board.

It is important to note that this Guideline is intended as a minimum requirement for school boards in developing their policies. School boards are responsible for establishing and complying with their pupil accommodation review policies to serve their local needs.

A copy of the school board’s pupil accommodation review policy, the government’s Pupil Accommodation Review Guideline and the Administrative Review of Accommodation Review Process documents are to be made available to the public as determined in the school board’s policy, and posted on the school board’s website.

The Guideline recognizes that pupil accommodation reviews include a school or group of schools to facilitate the development of viable solutions for pupil accommodation that support the guiding principles.

School board pupil accommodation review policies will include statements that encourage the sharing of relevant information as well as providing the opportunity for the public and affected school communities to be heard.

The Ministry of Education recommends that, wherever possible, schools should only be subject to a pupil accommodation review once in a five-year period, unless there are circumstances determined by the school board, such as a significant change in enrolment.

V. SCHOOL BOARD PLANNING PRIOR TO AN ACCOMMODATION REVIEW

As described in the Community Planning and Partnerships Guideline, school boards must undertake long-term capital and accommodation planning, informed

183

by any relevant information obtained from local municipal governments and other community partners, which takes into consideration long-term enrolment projections and planning opportunities for the effective use of excess space in all area schools.

School boards must document their efforts to obtain information from local municipal governments as well as other community partners that expressed an interest prior to the pupil accommodation review; and provide any relevant information from municipalities and other community partners as part of the initial staff report (see Section VI).

VI. ESTABLISHING AN ACCOMMODATION REVIEW

School boards may proceed to establish a pupil accommodation review only after undertaking the necessary assessment of long-term capital and accommodation planning options for the school(s).

Initial Staff Report

Prior to establishing a pupil accommodation review, the initial staff report to the Board of Trustees must contain one or more options to address the accommodation issue(s). Each option must have a supporting rationale. There must be a recommended option if more than one option is presented. The initial staff report must also include information on actions taken by school board staff prior to establishing a pupil accommodation review process and supporting rationale as to any actions taken or not taken.

The option(s) included in the initial staff report must address the following:

• summary of accommodation issue(s) for the school(s) under review; • where students would be accommodated; • if proposed changes to existing facility or facilities are required as a result

of the pupil accommodation review; • identify any program changes as a result of the proposed option; • how student transportation would be affected if changes take place; • if new capital investment is required as a result of the pupil

accommodation review, how the school board intends to fund this, as well as a proposal on how students would be accommodated if funding does not become available; and

• any relevant information obtained from municipalities and other community partners prior to the commencement of the pupil accommodation review, including any confirmed interest in using the underutilized space.

Each recommended option must also include a timeline for implementation.

The initial staff report and School Information Profiles (SIPs) (see Section VIII) will be made available to the public, as determined in the school board’s policy,

184

and posted on the school board’s website following the decision to proceed with a pupil accommodation review by the Board of Trustees.

School boards must ensure that individuals from the school(s) under review and the broader community are invited to participate in the pupil accommodation review consultation. At a minimum, the pupil accommodation review process must consist of the following methods of consultation:

• Accommodation Review Committee (ARC) (see Section VII); • consultation with municipal governments local to the affected school(s)

(see Section IX); • public meetings (see Section X); and • public delegations (see Section XI).

VII. THE ACCOMMODATION REVIEW COMMITTEE

Role

School boards must establish an ARC that represents the school(s) under review and acts as the official conduit for information shared between the school board and the school communities. The ARC may comment on the initial staff report and may, throughout the pupil accommodation review process, seek clarification of the initial staff report. The ARC may provide other accommodation options than those in the initial staff report; however, it must include supporting rationale for any such option.

The ARC members do not need to achieve consensus regarding the information provided to the Board of Trustees.

The school board’s staff resources assigned to the ARC are required to compile feedback from the ARC as well as the broader community in the Community Consultation section of the final staff report (see Section XI) to be presented to the Board of Trustees.

Membership

The membership of the ARC should include, at a minimum, parent/guardian representatives from each of the schools under review, chosen by their respective school communities.

Where established by a school board’s pupil accommodation review policy, there may also be the option to include students and representation from the broader community. For example, a school board’s policy may include a requirement for specific representation from the First Nations, Metis, and Inuit communities. In addition, school board trustees may be ad hoc ARC members to monitor the ARC progress.

185

Formation

The ARC should be formed following the Board of Trustees’ consideration of the initial staff report but prior to the first public meeting. The school board will invite ARC members from the school(s) under review to an orientation session that will describe the mandate, roles and responsibilities, and procedures of the ARC.

Terms of Reference

School boards will provide the ARC with Terms of Reference that describe the ARC’s mandate. The mandate will refer to the school board’s education and accommodation objectives in undertaking the ARC and reflect the school board’s strategy for supporting student achievement and well-being.

The Terms of Reference will also clearly outline the school board’s expectations of the roles and responsibilities of the ARC; and describe the procedures of the ARC. At a minimum, the ARC will provide feedback on the initial staff report option(s).

The Terms of Reference will outline the minimum number of working meetings of the ARC.

Meetings of the Accommodation Review Committee

The ARC will meet to review materials presented by school board staff. It is recommended that the ARC hold as many working meetings as is deemed necessary within the timelines established in their school board’s pupil accommodation review policy.

VIII. SCHOOL INFORMATION PROFILE

School board staff are required to develop School Information Profiles (SIPs) as orientation documents to help the ARC and the community understand the context surrounding the decision to include the specific school(s) in a pupil accommodation review. The SIP provides an understanding of and familiarity with the facilities under review.

The SIP is expected to include data for each of the following two considerations about the school(s) under review:

• value to the student; and • value to the school board.

A SIP will be completed by school board staff for each of the schools under review. The following are the minimum data requirements and factors that are to be included in the SIP:

186

• Facility Profile: o School name and address. o Site plan and floor plan(s) (or space template) of the school with the date

of school construction and any subsequent additions. o School attendance area (boundary) map. o Context map (or air photo) of the school indicating the existing land uses

surrounding the school. o Planning map of the school with zoning, Official Plan or secondary plan

land use designations. o Size of the school site (acres or hectares). o Building area (square feet or square metres). o Number of portable classrooms. o Number and type of instructional rooms as well as specialized classroom

teaching spaces (e.g., science lab, tech shop, gymnasium, etc.). o Area of hard surfaced outdoor play area and/or green space, the number

of play fields, and the presence of outdoor facilities (e.g., tracks, courts for basketball, tennis, etc.).

o Ten-year history of major facility improvements (item and cost). o Projected five-year facility renewal needs of school (item and cost). o Current Facility Condition Index (FCI) with a definition of what the index

represents. o A measure of proximity of the students to their existing school, and the

average distance to the school for students. o Percentage of students that are and are not eligible for transportation

under the school board policy, and the length of bus ride to the school (longest, shortest, and average length of bus ride times).

o School utility costs (totals, per square foot, and per student). o Number of parking spaces on site at the school, an assessment of the

adequacy of parking, and bus/car access and egress. o Measures that the school board has identified and/or addressed for

accessibility of the school for students, staff, and the public with disabilities (i.e., barrier-free).

o On-the-ground (OTG) capacity, and surplus/shortage of pupil places. • Instructional Profile:

o Describe the number and type of teaching staff, non-teaching staff, support staff, itinerant staff, and administrative staff at the school.

o Describe the course and program offerings at the school. o Describe the specialized service offerings at the school (e.g.,

cooperative placements, guidance counseling, etc.). o Current grade configuration of the school (e.g., junior kindergarten to

Grade 6, junior kindergarten to Grade 12, etc.). o Current grade organization of the school (e.g., number of combined

grades, etc.). o Number of out of area students. o Utilization factor/classroom usage.

187

o Summary of five previous years’ enrolment and 10-year enrolment projection by grade and program.

o Current extracurricular activities.

• Other School Use Profile: o Current non-school programs or services resident at or co-located with

the school as well as any revenue from these non-school programs or services and whether or not it is at full cost recovery.

o Current facility partnerships as well as any revenue from the facility partnerships and whether or not it is at full cost recovery.

o Community use of the school as well as any revenue from the community use of the school and whether or not it is at full cost recovery.

o Availability of before and after school programs or services (e.g., child care) as well as any revenue from the before and after school programs and whether or not it is at full cost recovery.

o Lease terms at the school as well as any revenue from the lease and whether or not it is at full cost recovery.

o Description of the school’s suitability for facility partnerships.

School boards may introduce additional items that could be used to reflect local circumstances and priorities which may help to further understand the school(s) under review.

Each school under review will have a SIP completed at the same point-in-time for comparison purposes. The Ministry of Education expects school boards to prepare SIPs that are complete and accurate, to the best of the school board’s ability, prior to the commencement of a pupil accommodation review.

While the ARC may request clarification about information provided in the SIP, it is not the role of the ARC to approve the SIP.

IX. CONSULTATION WITH LOCAL MUNICIPAL GOVERNMENTS

Following the Board of Trustees’ approval to undertake a pupil accommodation review, school boards must invite affected single and upper-tier municipalities as well as other community partners that expressed an interest prior to the pupil accommodation review to discuss and comment on the recommended option(s) in the school board’s initial staff report.

The invitation for this meeting will be provided through a written notice, and will be directed through the Clerks Department (or equivalent) for the affected single and upper-tier municipalities.

The affected single and upper-tier municipalities, as well as other community partners that expressed an interest prior to the pupil accommodation review, must provide their response on the recommended option(s) in the school board’s initial staff report before the final public meeting. School boards must provide

188

them with advance notice of when the final public meeting is scheduled to take place.

School boards must document their efforts to meet with the affected single and upper-tier municipalities, as well as other community partners that expressed an interest prior to the pupil accommodation review; and provide any relevant information from this meeting as part of the final staff report to the Board of Trustees (see Section XI).

X. PUBLIC MEETINGS

Once a school board has received an initial staff report and has approved the initiation of a pupil accommodation review, the school board must arrange to hold a minimum of two public meetings for broader community consultation on the initial staff report. School board staff are expected to facilitate the public meetings to solicit broader community feedback on the recommended option(s) contained in the initial staff report.

The public meetings are to be announced and advertised publicly by the school board through an appropriate range of media as determined by the school board.

At a minimum, the first public meeting must include the following:

• an overview of the ARC orientation session; • the initial staff report with recommended option(s); and • a presentation of the SIPs.

XI. COMPLETING THE ACCOMMODATION REVIEW

Final Staff Report

At the conclusion of the pupil accommodation review process, school board staff will submit a final staff report to the Board of Trustees which must be available to the public as determined in the school board’s policy, and posted on the school board’s website.

The final staff report must include a Community Consultation section that contains feedback from the ARC and any public consultations as well as any relevant information obtained from municipalities and other community partners prior to and during the pupil accommodation review.

School board staff may choose to amend their proposed option(s) included in the initial staff report. The recommended option(s) must also include a proposed accommodation plan, prepared for the decision of the Board of Trustees, which contains a timeline for implementation.

189

Delegations to the Board of Trustees Meeting

Once school board staff submits the final staff report to the Board of Trustees, the school board must allow an opportunity for members of the public to provide feedback on the final staff report through public delegations to the Board of Trustees. Notice of the public delegation opportunities will be provided based on school board policy.

After the public delegations, school board staff will compile feedback from the public delegations which will be presented to the Board of Trustees with the final staff report.

Decision of the Board of Trustees

The Board of Trustees will be provided with the final staff report, including the compiled feedback from the public delegations, when making its final decision regarding the pupil accommodation review.

The Board of Trustees has the discretion to approve the recommendation(s) of the final staff report as presented, modify the recommendation(s) of the final staff report, or to approve a different outcome.

The Ministry encourages school boards not to make final pupil accommodation review decisions during the summer holiday period (typically from July 1 to the day after Labour Day).

XII. TRANSITION PLANNING

The transition of students should be carried out in consultation with parents/guardians and staff. Following the decision to consolidate and/or close a school, the school board is expected to establish a separate committee to address the transition for students and staff.

XIII. TIMELINES FOR THE ACCOMMODATION REVIEW PROCESS

The pupil accommodation review process must comply with the following minimum timelines:

• Following the date of the Board of Trustees’ approval to conduct a pupil accommodation review, the school board will provide written notice of the Board of Trustees’ decision within 5 business days to each of the affected single and upper-tier municipalities through the Clerks Department (or equivalent), other community partners that expressed an interest prior to the pupil accommodation review; and include an invitation for a meeting to discuss and comment on the recommended option(s) in the school board’s

190

initial staff report. School boards must also notify the Director(s) of Education of their coterminous school boards and the Ministry of Education through the office of the Assistant Deputy Minister of the Financial Policy and Business Division.

• The affected single and upper-tier municipalities, as well as other community partners that expressed an interest prior to the pupil accommodation review, must provide their response on the recommended option(s) in the school board’s initial staff report before the final public meeting.

• Beginning with the date of the Board of Trustees’ approval to conduct a pupil accommodation review, there must be no fewer than 30 business days before the first public meeting is held.

• There must be a minimum period of 40 business days between the first and final public meetings.

• The final staff report must be publicly posted no fewer than 10 business days after the final public meeting.

• From the posting of the final staff report, there must be no fewer than 10 business days before the public delegations.

• There must be no fewer than 10 business days between public delegations and the final decision of the Board of Trustees.

XIV. MODIFIED ACCOMMODATION REVIEW PROCESS

In certain circumstances, where the potential pupil accommodation options available are deemed by the school board to be less complex, school boards may find it appropriate to undertake a modified pupil accommodation review process. The Guideline permits a school board to include an optional modified pupil accommodation review process in its pupil accommodation review policy.

A school board’s pupil accommodation review policy must clearly outline the conditions where a modified pupil accommodation review process could be initiated by explicitly defining the factors that would allow the school board the option to conduct a modified pupil accommodation review process. The conditions for conducting a modified pupil accommodation review process need to be based on two or more of the following factors:

• distance to the nearest available accommodation; • utilization rate of the facility; • number of students enrolled at the school; or

• when a school board is planning the relocation (in any school year or over a number of school years) of a program, in which the enrolment constitutes more than or equal to 50% of the school’s enrolment (this

191

calculation is based on the enrolment at the time of the relocation, or the first phase of a relocation carried over a number of school years).

School boards may consider additional factors that are defined in their pupil accommodation review policy to qualify for the modified pupil accommodation review process. Multiple factors may be developed by the school board to appropriately reflect varying conditions across the board (e.g., urban, rural, elementary panel, secondary panel, etc.). The Board of Trustees must approve these explicitly defined factors, after community consultation, in order to adopt a modified pupil accommodation review process as part of their school board’s pupil accommodation review policy.

The guiding principles of this Guideline apply to the modified pupil accommodation review process.

Even when the criteria for a modified pupil accommodation review are met, a school board may choose to use the standard pupil accommodation review process.

Implementing the Modified Accommodation Review Process

The initial staff report will explain the rationale for exempting the school(s) from the standard pupil accommodation review process, in accordance with the school board’s pupil accommodation review policy.

The initial staff report and SIPs must be made available to the public, as determined in the school board’s policy, and posted on the school board’s website.

A public meeting will be announced and advertised through an appropriate range of media as determined by the school board.

Following the public meeting, school board staff will submit a final staff report to the Board of Trustees which must be available to the public as determined in the school board’s policy, and posted on the school board’s website. The final staff report must include a Community Consultation section that contains feedback from any public consultations as well as any relevant information obtained from municipalities and other community partners prior to and during the modified pupil accommodation review.

Once school board staff submit the final staff report to the Board of Trustees, the school board must allow an opportunity for members of the public to provide feedback through public delegations to the Board of Trustees. Notice of the public delegation opportunities will be provided based on school board policy.

After the public delegations, school board staff will compile feedback from the public delegations which will be presented to the Board of Trustees with the final staff report.

192

The Board of Trustees has the discretion to approve the recommendation(s) of the final staff report as presented, modify the recommendation(s) of the final staff report, or to approve a different outcome.

The Ministry encourages school boards not to make final pupil accommodation review decisions during the summer holiday period (typically from July 1 to the day after Labour Day).

A transition plan will be put in place following the decision to consolidate and/or close a school.

Timelines for the Modified Accommodation Review Process

The modified pupil accommodation review process must comply with the following minimum timelines:

• Following the date of the Board of Trustees’ approval to conduct a modified pupil accommodation review, the school board will provide written notice of the Board of Trustees’ decision within 5 business days to each of the affected single and upper-tier municipalities through the Clerks Department (or equivalent), other community partners that expressed an interest prior to the modified pupil accommodation review; and include an invitation for a meeting to discuss and comment on the recommended option(s) in the school board’s initial staff report. School boards must also notify the Director(s) of Education of their coterminous school boards and the Ministry of Education through the office of the Assistant Deputy Minister of the Financial Policy and Business Division.

• The affected single and upper-tier municipalities, as well as other community partners that expressed an interest prior to the modified pupil accommodation review, must provide their response on the recommended option(s) in the school board’s initial staff report before the final public meeting.

• The school board must hold at least one public meeting. Beginning with the date of the Board of Trustees’ approval to conduct a modified pupil accommodation review, there must be no fewer than 30 business days before this public meeting is held.

• The final staff report must be publicly posted no fewer than 10 business days after the final public meeting.

• From the posting of the final staff report, there must be no fewer than 10 business days before the public delegations.

• There must be no fewer than 10 business days between public delegations and the final decision of the Board of Trustees.

193

XV. EXEMPTIONS

This Guideline applies to schools offering elementary or secondary programs. However, there are specific circumstances where school boards are not obligated to undertake a pupil accommodation review. These include:

• where a replacement school is to be built by the school board on the existing site, or built or acquired within the existing school attendance boundary, as identified through the school board’s policy;

• where a replacement school is to be built by the school board on the existing site, or built or acquired within the existing school attendance boundary and the school community must be temporarily relocated to ensure the safety of students and staff during the reconstruction, as identified through the school board’s policy;

• when a lease for the school is terminated;

• when a school board is planning the relocation (in any school year or over a number of school years) of grades or programs, in which the enrolment constitutes less than 50% of the school’s enrolment (this calculation is based on the enrolment at the time of the relocation, or the first phase of a relocation carried over a number of school years);

• when a school board is repairing or renovating a school, and the school community must be temporarily relocated to ensure the safety of students during the renovations;

• where a facility has been serving as a holding school for a school community whose permanent school is over-capacity and/or is under construction or repair; or

• where there are no students enrolled at the school at any time throughout the school year.

In the above circumstances, a school board is expected to inform school communities about proposed accommodation plans for students before a decision is made by the Board of Trustees. The school board will also provide written notice to each of the affected single and upper-tier municipalities through the Clerks Department (or equivalent), as well as other community partners that expressed an interest prior to the exemption, and their coterminous school boards in the areas of the affected school(s) through the Director of Education, and to the Ministry of Education through the Assistant Deputy Minister of the Financial Policy and Business Division no fewer than 5 business days after the decision to proceed with an exemption.

194

A transition plan will be put in place following the Board of Trustees’ decision to consolidate, close or move a school or students in accordance with this section.

XVI. DEFINITIONS

Accommodation review: A process, as defined in a school board pupil accommodation review policy, undertaken by a school board to determine the future of a school or group of schools.

Accommodation Review Committee (ARC): A committee, established by a school board that represents the affected school(s) of a pupil accommodation review, which acts as the official conduit for information shared between the school board and the affected school communities.

ARC working meeting: A meeting of ARC members to discuss a pupil accommodation review, and includes a meeting held by the ARC to solicit feedback from the affected school communities of a pupil accommodation review.

Business day: A calendar day that is not a weekend or statutory holiday. It also does not include calendar days that fall within school boards’ Christmas, spring, and summer break. For schools with a year-round calendar, any break that is five calendar days or longer is not a business day.

Consultation: The sharing of relevant information as well as providing the opportunity for municipalities and other community partners, the public and affected school communities to be heard.

Facility Condition Index (FCI): A building condition as determined by the Ministry of Education by calculating the ratio between the five-year renewal needs and the replacement value for each facility.

On-the-ground (OTG) capacity: The capacity of the school as determined by the Ministry of Education by loading all instructional spaces within the facility to current Ministry standards for class size requirements and room areas.

Public delegation: A regular meeting of the Board of Trustees where presentations by groups or individuals can have their concerns heard directly by the school board trustees.

Public meeting: An open meeting held by the school board to solicit broader community feedback on a pupil accommodation review.

School Information Profile (SIP): An orientation document with point-in-time data for each of the schools under a pupil accommodation review to help the ARC and the community understand the context surrounding the decision to include the specific school(s) in a pupil accommodation review.

195

Space template: A Ministry of Education template used by a school board to determine the number and type of instructional areas to be included within a new school, and the size of the required operational and circulation areas within that school.

196

MINISTRY OF EDUCATION

COMMUNITY PLANNING AND PARTNERSHIPS GUIDELINE

March 2015

Appendix D

197

Purpose

The purpose of the Community Planning and Partnerships (CPP) Guideline is to encourage school boards to reach out to community organizations to share planning information with community organizations on a regular basis. In particular, boards are encouraged to ensure that additional efforts are made to share this information with community organizations prior to commencing a pupil accommodation review.

This information sharing will allow school boards and other entities to work together to the benefit of boards, students and the community, and to optimize the use of public assets owned by school boards. This Guideline is intended to assist boards in establishing more facility partnerships, and to support effective planning with community partners regarding land-use and green space/park planning. Boards are expected to revise or develop their own policy/policies that are consistent with this Guideline.

This Guideline focuses on opportunities to share facilities with community partners when building new schools and undertaking significant renovations, when considering the use of unoccupied space in schools, and when considering properties associated with schools that may close and sites that may be considered for future disposition. The Guideline is consistent with the legal framework outlined in the Education Act regarding the disposition of both surplus and non-surplus property and the joint use of schools.

Overview

Cooperative and collaborative relationships between school boards and community organizations are part of the foundation of a strong, vibrant and sustainable publicly funded education system. Around the province, school boards have successful facility partnerships with co-terminous boards and other entities that enable boards to reduce facility costs and/or improve educational opportunities. Some boards have successfully leased or sold space to their local municipality, resulting in a re-purposed local community hub or in protected public access to green space/parks. The Ministry is encouraging boards and their community partners to build on that success by putting measures in place to increase the opportunities for expanding the number of partnerships as well as long-term planning in a way that is well-informed, well-coordinated, transparent, sustainable and supportive of student achievement.

It is the responsibility of all levels of government to make the best use of public assets. The twin challenges of local enrolment changes and making the best use of education funding to support student achievement create an incentive and opportunity to maximize the use of school board facilities and properties. Offering space in schools to partners can also strengthen the role of schools in communities, provide a place for programs and facilitate the coordination of, and improve access to, services for students and the wider community.

School boards’ primary responsibility is to support the achievement and safety of students. Within that context, the intent of the Community Planning and Partnerships Guideline is to:

• Reduce facility operating costs for school boards and government; • Improve services and supports available to students; • Strengthen relationships between schools boards and community partners and the

public;

198

• Maximize the use of public infrastructure through increased flexibility and utilization; and

• Provide a foundation for improved service delivery for communities.

The Guideline has eight components, outlined below:

1. The identification of CPP opportunities in board planning. 2. The development or review of board CPP policies. 3. The development of a process to notify community partners. 4. Planning for an annual CPP meeting. 5. School board planning prior to a pupil accommodation review. 6. The consideration of opportunities for co-building with community partners. 7. The consideration of opportunities for sharing unused space in schools with

community partners. 8. Partnership agreements and cost-recovery.

School boards have the authority to make decisions regarding their school facilities and the use of their properties that are consistent with the Education Act. This Guideline does not prevent boards from building, renovating or closing schools or from disposing of surplus assets when required. Boards will continue to identify which schools will or will not be suitable for facility partnerships based on board-determined criteria.

Boards will continue to follow Ontario Regulation 444/98 regarding the lease or sale of surplus assets, including schools or parts of schools. Boards currently have the authority to co-build schools with other entities and to enter into a variety of facility partnerships through license or joint use agreement as outlined in paragraph 44 of subsection 171 (1), paragraph 4 of subsection 171.1 (2), and sections 183, 194 and 196 of the Education Act, although the Education Act requires Minister approval in some circumstances. While boards will continue to declare facilities and unused space surplus where appropriate, the Ministry recognizes that there are circumstances in open and operating schools where a board may not consider unused space to be surplus. These circumstances may be related to enrolment fluctuations, program changes or the size of space. Boards may choose to enter into license or joint use agreements for space that is unused but not surplus.

The Guideline is not intended to disrupt agreements with existing facility partners. The Guideline focuses on facility partnerships, and does not address the service or program exchanges between boards and community organizations or other entities. Strong partnerships between boards and service providers can and do exist without co-location. At the same time, experience demonstrates that the sharing of facilities may create opportunities for coordination and collaboration in service and program delivery, so boards are encouraged to build relationships with their facility partners.

The Ministry recognizes that encouraging community planning and facility partnerships will be most effective when community partners work with school boards and notify them in a timely manner when they are looking for space or considering new construction.

1. School Board Planning and Broader Community Objectives

School boards are expected to have capital plans that address the future needs of their students. Areas of enrolment growth and decline should be presented. Plans should include

199

enrolment projections, school capacity, renewal needs, potential consolidations and the construction of new schools or additions, including significant renovations.

Through this planning process, boards forecast where new schools or additions may be needed; which schools will remain well-utilized; which open and operating schools may have unused space; and which schools may be candidates for consolidation or closure. This information will assist boards in identifying facilities that may be suitable for facility partnerships with respect to new construction and unused space in schools and in administrative buildings. It also provides an opportunity to consider potential surplus properties in which community partners may be interested.

School boards are expected to share this planning information with community partners so that external entities may have sufficient time to respond to presented opportunities. These opportunities may include participation in a facility partnership or contribution to land-use or green space/park plans. Boards are expected to include information related to their CPP policy and discussions with community organizations in school information profiles when undertaking the accommodation review process.

Where unused space is declared surplus, boards will continue to follow the circulation process outlined in O. Reg. 444/98. Where the unused space in open and operating schools is not surplus, but is available for partnership, or where the partnership opportunity involves new construction, the information will be provided to potential partners through the notification process outlined in Section 3 below.

2. Community Planning and Partnership (CPP) Policies

It is the role and responsibility of school boards to determine what facilities are suitable and not suitable for facility partnerships, what entities are suitable and not suitable partners, and when to enter into a partnership. The intent of the Community Planning and Partnerships Guideline is to ensure that these decisions are made in a way that is well-informed, well-coordinated, transparent and consistent with student achievement and safety.

Boards are expected to develop CPP policies that identify:

• Principles and criteria regarding the eligibility of partners; • How available space in schools will be selected; • What entities will be selected for the notification list; • How potential partners will be notified of available space and construction plans; • How entities will be selected for partnerships, including prioritization, if applicable.

When developing criteria regarding the eligibility of partners, boards are expected to consider the value of the partnership to students. Boards, in compliance with local bylaws, may consider both for-profit and non-profit entities, as they see fit. Boards will also incorporate the following requirements:

• Health and safety of students must be protected. • Partnership must be appropriate for the school setting. • Partnership must not compromise the student achievement strategy.

200

• Entities that provide competing education services such as tutoring services, JK-12 private schools or private colleges, and credit offering entities that are not government-funded, are not eligible partners.

At a minimum, board CPP policy or policies are expected to reflect the requirements of the Ministry Guideline. Where a board has more than one policy related to facility partnerships, the board is encouraged to ensure all relevant policies are accessible to and understandable by the public.

Facility sharing between publicly funded school boards through co-ownership, lease or other agreements remains a priority for the Ministry and school boards. Board facility partnerships policies should not disadvantage co-terminous boards that have priority status under O. Reg 444/98.

3. CPP Notification Process

For surplus space being offered for sale or lease, boards will continue to follow the circulation process outlined in O. Reg. 444/98. For non-surplus space, boards will follow a new notification process similar to the circulation process in O. Reg. 444/98.

For the notification process, boards are to post information on their website regarding their intention to build new schools and to undertake significant renovations and information regarding unused space in open and operating schools and administrative buildings that is available for facility partnerships. This information should be updated at least once a year in the case of space in existing schools, and as needed in the case of co-building opportunities. Boards are also expected to post on their website the name and contact information of the staff member at the board who will respond to questions regarding facility partnerships throughout the year.

Boards are also expected to inform entities on their notification list when key information regarding community planning or facility partnerships is changed or updated. To create the notification list, boards will address the following requirements:

• List will reflect at a minimum the entities listed in Ontario Regulation 444/98 – Disposition of Surplus Real Property, and must specifically include:

All applicable levels of municipal government (single, upper, lower tiers) Applicable District Social Services Administration Board(s) or

Consolidated Municipal Service Manager(s) Applicable Public Health Boards, Local Health Integration Networks and

Children’s Mental Health Centres • Boards may prioritize their notification list as they see fit. • If child care operators or government-funded organizations request it, they will be

added to the notification list. • Boards may add any other entity to their notification list based on their CPP policy.

4. Annual CPP Meeting

Boards are to hold at least one meeting per year to discuss potential planning and partnership opportunities with the public and community organizations. Additional staff-level meetings may be held to discuss additional information with relevant entities. Boards are

201

expected to notify both the entities on their notification list and the general public about the annual meeting.

During the annual CPP meeting, the school board will provide/present all or a portion of the board’s capital plan (as described in Section 1.), details of any schools deemed eligible for facility partnerships, relevant information available on their website and any supplementary CPP information. This information should be shared either during the public meeting or during the optional staff-level meeting, as appropriate.

When inviting entities on the notification list to the annual meeting, school boards must clearly request that organizations prepare to bring relevant planning information, including but not limited to, population projections, growth plans, community needs, land-use and green space/park requirements. The school board is to listen to what needs or plans community partners may have. The invitation list, the entities in attendance at the annual CPP meeting and any information exchanged should be formally documented by the school board.

The CPP meeting may be a stand-alone meeting or may be held as part of a scheduled board meeting. Boards that cover a large geography may want to consider holding meetings in more than one community over time.

5. School Board Planning Prior to a Pupil Accommodation Review

In addition to the annual CPP meeting, school boards should continue discussions with affected municipalities and other community organizations as they explore options to address underutilized space issues in schools within specific areas of their board. These discussions will inform proposals that school board staff may present to the Board of Trustees, including recommendations to undertake a pupil accommodation review process.

As part of these discussions with community organizations, school boards should obtain a clear indication of any community planning and partnership opportunities in areas where a pupil accommodation review may take place. Additionally, school boards are to request technical information from the local municipality or municipalities where a planned pupil accommodation review will occur. This technical information is to be specified by the school board and can include, but is not limited to, population and future development projections in the area.

The Pupil Accommodation Review Guideline provides a full description of the pupil accommodation review process that school boards are required to undertake prior to making a pupil accommodation decision.

6. Co-building with Community Partners

The construction of new schools, additions and renovations represents a significant public investment in a long-term asset. It is also an opportunity to leverage other infrastructure investments by co-building with entities that provide services and programs for children, their families and the broader community. For example, a municipality may seek to build an adjoining community centre or child care centre.

The Ministry’s objective is to give potential partners enough time to evaluate their own need

202

for a new facility and to identify funding sources. As part of the planning process, when considering building a new school or undertaking a significant addition or renovation, boards are expected to notify the entities on their notification list 1 to 3 years prior to the potential construction start date. Boards should provide as much information as possible about their plans and the site to support potential partners in determining the project’s suitability for their purposes.

The notification should be supported by a board resolution. Boards do not need to have an identified source of funding or Ministry approval when they notify their partners of their plan or intention to build. Similarly, plans to build may be contingent on board decisions that have not yet been made.

Once notified, entities may express their interest in co-building with the board. The board will then evaluate the expressions of interest to select partner(s) based on its CPP policy. The Minister’s approval may be required depending on the provision under the Education Act authorizing the transaction. Partnership agreements cannot be finalized until both the board and the partner/s have an approved source of funding. Requests for Ministry funding and requests for transfer from reserve approvals are expected to reflect that boards have already solicited interest from partners. The Ministry prefers that boards and facility partners have ownership of their respective portions of the facility, where the portions are sizeable.

Boards should encourage community partners to provide notification to the board when community partners have proposals or plans to build their own new facilities. Boards should enable community partners to provide this information directly or during the facility partnership-related public meetings held by the board. When building or renovating schools, school boards and the Ministry often have deadlines related to student accommodation needs or funding parameters. School boards are expected to make their timelines clear to potential partners and may establish policies to ensure that timelines are maintained.

7. Sharing Unused Space in Existing Schools with Community Partners

The Ministry expects that boards will review underutilized open and operating schools and administrative facilities for their suitability for partnership, based on criteria outlined by the board. As a starting point, boards should review facilities that have been 60 percent utilized or less for two years and/or have 200 or more unused pupil places, and then should extend their review to other potentially suitable facilities. Boards must consider the space needs of existing educational programming and initiatives.

The Ministry recognizes that available space is not the only criteria for selecting schools for partnerships. Boards will also consider issues related to student safety, the board's student achievement and pupil accommodation strategies (including those that may result in school consolidations and closures), zoning and site use restrictions, facility condition, the configuration of space and the ability to separate the space used by partners from the space used by students, among other factors. These factors should be outlined in the board's CPP policy.

If the space is both suitable for facility partnerships and is available for the long-term, boards are expected to consider declaring the space surplus and circulating it for lease through O. Reg. 444/98. If the space is suitable for facility partnerships but is not surplus to board needs, boards are expected to follow the notification process outlined in the Guideline. This notification should be supported by a board resolution. Boards are expected to provide

203

information about the available space, including but not limited to size, location, facility amenities, and required renovations, if needed.

Entities may then express their interest in using the space. Boards will evaluate the expressions of interest to select partner(s) based on their CPP policy. Boards then may enter into a license or joint use agreement. The Minister’s approval may be required depending on the provision under the Education Act allowing the transaction.

8. Partnership Agreements and Cost-Recovery

Boards are responsible for providing clear instructions to potential partners regarding their rights and responsibilities as tenants, including maintenance standards and the applicability, or the lack thereof, of board user policies, including accessibility and inclusiveness policies. Boards are responsible for ensuring proper legal agreements that respect the Education Act and protect their rights.

Boards are not expected to take on additional costs to support facility partnerships, although boards will continue to use their discretion in supporting partnerships based on their student achievement strategy. On a cost-recovery basis, the fees charged to partners should cover the operations and capital cost, including administrative costs and property taxes (if applicable), to the board of the space occupied by the partner. Additional costs to perform minor renovations to protect student safety, provide appropriate washrooms, and otherwise make the space suitable for use by facility partners should be borne by the partners. Financial expectations should be made clear to potential partners in the board’s policy.

In co-building, partners will be required to pay for and finance their share of construction, including a proportional share of joint-use or shared space. Boards will continue to be expected to build within Ministry space and funding benchmarks for the board portion of the facility.

204

OPERATING POLICY HALTON CATHOLIC DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD

SCHOOL ACCOMMODATION REVIEW – CONSOLIDATION/CLOSURE

POLICY NO.: I-9 DATE : OCTOBER 27, 1987 AMENDED : OCTOBER 29, 1996 AMENDED : MARCH 23, 2004 AMENDED : SEPTEMBER 18, 2007 AMENDED : MARCH 3, 2009 AMENDED : MAY 18, 2010

APPROVED MAY 18, 2010 PAGE 1 OF 8

The purpose of this policy is to provide the framework for dealing with the usage of school buildings to support the provision of quality Catholic educational programs and services in optimally utilized, quality facilities with clear direction on school consolidation developed in collaboration with, and edified by, public input and participation. This policy incorporates the revised Pupil Accommodation Review Guidelines released by the Ministry of Education on June 26, 2009 (Ministry Memorandum 2009:B2). The revised Pupil Accommodation Review Guidelines (PARG) and the Ministry document entitled, Administrative Review of the Accommodation Review Process are attached as Appendix A and Appendix B respectively to this Policy.

APPLICATION & SCOPE

This policy applies to all schools within the jurisdiction of the Halton Catholic District School Board (hereinafter referred to as the “Board”). The PARG states that, “wherever possible, accommodation reviews should focus on a group of schools within a Board’s planning area rather than examine a single school”. The Board’s elementary schools are generally organized in groups, and linked to a secondary school, referred to as a Family of Schools. The goal of providing a suitable and equitable range of learning opportunities in a school or a group of schools requires monitoring and active curriculum and programming decisions. Decisions that might require consolidation, closure, or major program relocation should take into account the needs of all the students in all of the schools in a particular group. There may, however, be circumstances in which a single school should be studied for closure. The PARG also requires that, “school boards are expected to undertake long-term enrolment and capital planning that will provide the context for accommodation review processes and decisions” and that “this planning should take into account opportunities for partnerships with other school boards and appropriate public organizations that are financially sustainable, safe for students, and protect the core values and objectives of the Board”. Any decisions under this policy should therefore take into account the Board’s Long-Term Capital Plan (LTCP). The following are not actions to which this policy applies:

Where a replacement school is to be rebuilt by the Board on the existing site, or rebuilt or acquired within the existing school attendance boundary as identified through the Board’s existing policies;

When a lease is terminated;

When the Board is planning the relocation in any school year or over a number of school years of a grade or grades, or a program, where the enrolment constitutes less than 50% of the enrolment of the school; this calculation is based on the enrolment at the time of the relocation or the first phase of a relocation carried over a number of school years;

When the Board is repairing or renovating a school, and the school community must be temporarily relocated to ensure the safety of students during the renovations;

Where a facility has been serving as a holding school for a school community whose permanent school is over-capacity and/or is under construction or repair.

PURPOSE

Appendix E

205





PRINCIPLES

The Board recognizes that it has a fundamental duty to provide educational programs, services and

adequate accommodation during each school year for the pupils who have a right to attend a school under its jurisdiction.

The Board acknowledges and accepts that the Catholic School serves as a centre for the local Catholic community and supports Church activities and the local Parish.

A school adjacent to a Church represents, by its proximity, the close relationship that should exist between the local Parish and all of the schools within the Parish.

The Board provides for each of its schools the appropriate staff complement to deliver the prescribed programs within economically feasible conditions.

Schools offering system programs for Special Needs and French Immersion students are recognized as serving a broader regional community.

Where any school is host to a Special Education class with partial integration or full-time Special Education class as defined by the Education Act, the students attending this classroom will be recognized as an integral part of the school community and may not, for the purposes of an Accommodation/Consolidation Review, be considered separate from the general school community.

The Board acknowledges that the optimum use of school facilities may require the consolidation of schools.

The Board endorses a process for considering the consolidation of schools that includes opportunities for community consultation and participation. The Board agrees with the Ministry of Education’s observation in the document entitled Good Places to Learn: Renewing Ontario Schools released on February 17, 2005 (Ministry Memorandum 2005:B2) that, “the education program needs of students must lead decisions concerning buildings and grounds”, and that “there is a strong link between the standard of the physical environment and good outcomes, such as better student performance and higher teacher retention”.

DEFINITIONS

Ministry - Ministry of Education for the Province of Ontario.

Accommodation Review Committee (ARC) - an advisory body established by the Board to conduct a public accommodation review of a school or group of schools, which must include membership drawn from the community.

Pupil Accommodation Review Guideline (PARG) - is a Ministry document that provides direction to the school boards regarding the public accommodation reviews undertaken to determine the future of a school or group of schools.

Administrative Review of Accommodation Review Process - is a Ministry document that sets out the conditions under which the Ministry may conduct a review of a school board’s accommodation review process once the process is complete and once the Board of Trustees have made a decision.

Average Daily Enrolment (ADE) - the measure of enrolment used for Ministry funding purposes and which is calculated using two count dates within the school year: October 31st and March 31st. The full-time equivalent of students enrolled in a board’s schools are weighted at 0.5 for each of the count dates.

206





Junior Kindergarten (JK) and Senior Kindergarten (SK) pupils are counted as half time students. Where a school has implemented the Ministry’s Early Learning Program, JK and SK pupils will be counted as full-time students.

On the Ground Capacity (OTG) - the rated capacity for a facility as indicated on the Ministry of Education School Facilities Inventory System.

Operating Costs - encompasses all of the expenditures required to operate the Board facilities including but not limited to heating, lighting, maintaining and cleaning.

Long-Term Capital Plan (LTCP) - the Board’s flexible study identifying future school accommodation adjustments that are anticipated based on current and future enrolment projections. The LTCP identifies projects that the Board is considering over a 15 year period.

Director of Education (Director) - the Director of Education of the Halton Catholic District School Board.

1.0 SCHOOL ACCOMMODATION UTILIZATION REVIEW

1.1 The process for determining whether a school accommodation review should be initiated will begin with a review of the utilization of the Board’s existing accommodations. This initial review should be undertaken by the Superintendent of Facility Management Services in collaboration with the Superintendent of Business Services, a Superintendent of School Services and the Administrator of Planning Services in accordance with the Board’s most recent LTCP.

1.1.1 The review is to consider, at a minimum:

The impact of the current and projected enrolment on the operation of the school(s) and on program delivery;

The current physical condition of the school(s) and any repairs or upgrades required to ensure optimum operation of the building(s) and program delivery.

1.2 In the event that the School Accommodation Utilization Review indicates a school consolidation may be required, a Preliminary School Accommodation Review Report shall be brought forward to the Board of Trustees.

2.0 PRELIMINARY SCHOOL ACCOMMODATION REVIEW REPORT

2.1 In the Preliminary School Accommodation Review Report, to be presented to the Board of Trustees, the Director may recommend the review of school(s) for potential consolidation.

2.2 The Preliminary School Accommodation Review Report will include at least one alternative accommodation option. The option(s) will address where students would be accommodated; what changes to existing facilities may be required; what programs would be available to students and address transportation concerns. In the event the option(s) require a new capital investment, the Preliminary School Accommodation Review Report will advise on the availability of funding, and where no funding exists, will propose how students would be accommodated if funding does not become available.

3.0 DECISION TO ESTABLISH AND FORMATION OF THE ARC

3.1 After reviewing the Preliminary School Accommodation Review Report, the Board of Trustees

REQUIREMENTS

207





may direct the formation of an ARC for a single school or group of schools.

3.2 Parent(s)/guardian(s), staff and Catholic School Council members of the affected school(s) will be informed in writing within seven (7) days of the Board’s decision to form an ARC and the decision will be posted on the Board’s website.

3.3 All notice periods within the ARC’s schedule are based on calendar days. Summer vacation, Christmas break and Spring break, including adjacent weekends are not considered in the required 30, 60 or 90 calendar day periods set out in the PARG.

3.4 After the decision has been made to establish the ARC, written invitation will be forwarded to potential ARC members as identified in Appendix C – Accommodation Review Committee Terms of Reference, Section 2.0-Membership of the ARC, subsection 2.1.

4.0 INFORMATION TO THE ARC

4.1 In accordance with the PARG, the Board shall provide the ARC with a copy of this policy. The Terms of Reference (TOR) for the ARC which describes its mandate are attached as Appendix C.

4.1.1 Prior to the commencement of any ARC, Board staff may revise the Terms of Reference if such revisions are warranted.

4.2 In accordance with the PARG, a School Information Profile (SIP) will be prepared by Board staff for each of the school(s) under review (refer to Appendix D). The profile will include data that addresses the following considerations about the school:

Value to the Student

Value to the School Board

Value to the Community

Value to the Local Economy

4.2.1 The completed SIP(s) will be provided to the ARC prior to or at its first working meeting. The SIP will also include in the following:

The section of the Board’s most recent LTCP that deals with the municipality or area under review;

Relevant background information regarding the school(s) located within the area of the accommodation review.

4.2.2 The ARC will review the completed SIP(s) and have the opportunity to discuss, consult on, modify based on new or improved information and finalize the SIP(s). If there are multiple schools under review, the framework of the SIP must be the same for each school under review.

4.2.3 The ARC is to recognize that the school’s value to the student takes priority over other considerations regarding the school.

4.2.4 Prior to the commencement of an ARC, Board staff may revise the questions contained in the SIP if such revisions are warranted.

4.3 In accordance with the PARG, the Board will inform the ARC at the beginning of the process about known or reasonably anticipated partnership opportunities, or lack thereof, as identified as part of the Board’s long-term planning process.

5.0 ARC ACCOMMODATION REPORT

208





Through a series of working meetings and a minimum of four (4) public meetings, the ARC will in accordance with the PARG, author an Accommodation Report that will make accommodation recommendation(s) consistent with the objectives and Reference Criteria outlined in the TOR attached to this policy as Appendix C. The ARC will deliver its Accommodation Report to the Director, who will have the ARC Accommodation Report posted on the Board’s website. The ARC will present its Accommodation Report to the Board of Trustees.

6.0 DIRECTOR’S REPORT

6.1 Administrative Council will review the recommendation(s) contained in the ARC Accommodation Report, and Board staff will prepare the Director’s Report which will be presented to the Board of Trustees in public session at a regularly scheduled meeting or a special meeting.

6.2 The Director’s Report will include the ARC Accommodation Report as an appendix.

6.3 The recommendation(s) accompanying the Director’s Report may be one or more of the following:

To maintain the school(s) and to continue to monitor it/them;

To reorganize the school(s), it/their program(s) or it/their grade structures, including any renovations or repairs that may be required;

To change the boundaries of the school(s);

To consolidate and/or close one or more of the schools

6.4 The Director’s Report and recommendation(s) shall be made public and copies provided to the ARC a minimum of fourteen (14) calendar days prior to the Board Meeting for Public Input as outlined in Section 7.0 of this policy.

6.5 The Director’s Report and recommendation(s), as well as the ARC Accommodation Report will be presented to the Board of Trustees in public session at a regularly scheduled meeting or a special meeting not less than thirty (30) calendar days after the ARC Accommodation Report has been delivered to the Director.

7.0 BOARD MEETING FOR PUBLIC INPUT

7.1 In addition to the public input sought through the work of the ARC, the Board will hold a Meeting for Public Input no sooner than thirty (30) calendar days after the Director’s Report is presented to the Board in public session. This is to provide an opportunity for the public to make formal representations to the Board concerning the Director’s Report and the ARC Accommodation Report. The Meeting for Public Input may be scheduled as part of the Board’s regularly scheduled meeting or a special meeting. On the date that the Board schedules the Board Meeting for Public Input, it will also schedule the Board Meeting to Decide on School Accommodation Review referred to in Section 9.0 of this policy.

7.2 A minimum of fourteen (14) calendar days notice of the Board Meeting for Public Input shall be provided via school newsletters, letters to the school community, Parish bulletins (where possible), the Board’s website and advertisements in local community newspapers and shall include date, time, location, purpose, contact name and email address.

8.0 DIRECTOR’S FOLLOW-UP REPORT TO THE BOARD

8.1 Following the Board Meeting for Public Input, the Director will prepare a Follow-Up Report to the Board, reporting on and responding to the representations made by the Public for the next

209





regularly scheduled meeting or special meeting. If warranted, the Director may revise the earlier recommendation(s) to the Board of Trustees.

8.2 The Director’s Follow-Up Report to the Board will include copies of the presentations made by the public during the Board Meeting for Public Input and those received directly, as well as the minutes of the Board Meeting for Public Input.

8.3 The Director’s Follow-Up Report to the Board will be released publicly and be posted on the Board’s website.

9.0 BOARD MEETING TO DECIDE ON SCHOOL ACCOMMODATION REVIEW

9.1 Public notice of the meeting, at which the Board of Trustees will make its decision regarding the school accommodation review, will be provided through school newsletters, letters to the school community, Parish bulletins (where possible), the Board’s website and advertisements in local community newspapers, and shall include date, time, location, purpose, contact name and email address, at least sixty (60) calendar days prior to the date of the Board meeting.

9.2 The Board of Trustees will make its decision regarding the school accommodation recommendation(s) addressed in the ARC Report, the Director’s Report and the Director’s Follow-Up Report to the Board at a regularly scheduled Board meeting or special meeting. This meeting will not occur sooner than sixty (60) calendar days after the presentation of the Director’s Report, thirty (30) calendar days after the Board Meeting for Public Input and fifteen (15) calendar days after the Director’s Follow-Up Report to the Board is released publicly in accordance with the PARG.

9.3 The Board of Trustees may make any accommodation decision that it deems advisable in relation to the school(s) under review by an ARC regardless of an ARC’s recommendation(s).

9.4 If the Board of Trustees’ decision is consolidation, closure or major program relocation, the following school year will be used to plan for and implement the Board’s decision, except where the Board in consultation with the affected community, decides that earlier action is required. The Board decision will set clear timelines regarding consolidation, closure, or major program relocation.

9.5 Within fourteen (14) calendar days of the Board of Trustees’ decision, Parent(s)/Guardian(s), Staff and School Council members of the potentially affected school(s) will be informed in writing, by the Board of its decision regarding the school consolidation, through their respective school(s), via school newsletters, letters to the school community, Parish bulletins (where possible) and the Board’s website.

10.0 ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW OF ACCOMMODATION REVIEW PROCESS

10.1 An individual or group may seek a review of the Board’s accommodation review process in accordance with the Ministry’s document entitled “Administrative Review of Accommodation Review Process” which is appended to this Policy as Appendix B and posted on the Board’s website and available at the Catholic Education Centre upon request.

10.2 In accordance with the Administrative Review of Accommodation Review Process, an individual

or group seeking a review of the Board’s accommodation review process is required to demonstrate the support of a portion of the school community through the completion of a petition signed by a number of supporters equal to at least 30% of the affect school’s student headcount (eg. If the headcount is 150, then 45 signatures would be required). Parents/Guardians of students and/or other individuals that participated in the accommodation review process are eligible to sign the petition.

210





11.0 TABLE OF ARC TIMELINES AND MILESTONES

ACTION BY WHOM TO WHO WHEN PROVISION

School Accommodation Utilization Review

Staff Admin. Council

On an as required basis 1.0

Presentation of the Preliminary School Accommodation Review Report to the Board

Director Board As a result of the School Accommodation Utilization Review

2.0

Decision to establish an ARC Trustees Public/ Board

As a result of the Preliminary School Accommodation Review Report

3.0

Notice of Board decision to establish an ARC

Director Public/ Board

Within 7 days of decision* 3.2

Establishment of the membership of the ARC


Following the decision to establish an ARC

3.4

Delivery of School Information Profile Package to ARC

Staff ARC Prior to or at the first working meeting

4.2

Notice of first ARC Public Meeting

ARC Public At least 30 days prior to the meeting*

Appendix C – 6.3

First ARC Public Meeting ARC Public As scheduled by ARC Appendix C – 6.3

Notice of second ARC Public Meeting


Appendix C – 6.3

Second ARC Public Meeting ARC Public As scheduled by ARC Appendix C – 6.3

Notice of third ARC Public Meeting


Appendix C – 6.3

Third ARC Public Meeting ARC Public As scheduled by ARC Appendix C – 6.3

Notice of the fourth ARC Public Meeting


Appendix C – 6.3

Fourth ARC Public Meeting ARC Public As scheduled by ARC Appendix C – 6.3

Delivery of the ARC Accommodation Report

ARC Director Not earlier than 90 days not later than 120 days after ARC’s first Public Meeting*

Appendix C - 7.1.3

Presentation of the Director’s Report and the ARC Accommodation Report

Director/ ARC

Public/ Board

Not less than 30 days after the ARC Accommodation Report was delivered to the Director*

6.5

Board Meeting for Public Input Director Public/ Board

As scheduled by the Board but not sooner than 30 days after the Director’s Report and recommendation(s) are presented to the Board of Trustees in public session*

7.1

211





*Calendar days, excluding from the calculation school holidays such as summer vacation, Christmas and Spring break, including adjacent weekends.

12.0 Administrative Procedure

The Director shall ensure the development of the administrative procedures for the implementation of this policy.

13.0 Appendices

13.1 Appendix A - Ministry of Education (Revised) Pupil Accommodation Review Guidelines

13.2 Appendix B – Ministry of Education Administrative Review of Accommodation Review Process

13.3 Appendix C – Accommodation Review Committee Terms of Reference

13.4 Appendix D – Accommodation Review Committee School Information Profile

APPROVED: Regular Meeting of the Board Authorized by: …………………………………………………

B. Van de Vrande, Chair of the Board

ACTION BY WHOM TO WHO WHEN PROVISION

Notice of Board Meeting for Public Input


A minimum of 14 days notice of the Public Meeting*

7.2

Board Meeting for Public Input Director Public/ Board

Next regularly scheduled or special meeting

7.1

Director’s Follow-Up Report to the Board


Following the Board Meeting for Public Input at a regularly scheduled or special meeting

8.1

Notice of Board Meeting to Decide on School Accommodation Review


60 days prior to the Board Meeting to Decide on School Accommodation Review*

9.1

Board Meeting to Decide on School Accommodation Review

Trustees Public/ Board

At a regularly scheduled or special meeting which will not occur sooner than 60 days after the presentation of the Director’s Report to the Board, 30 days after the Board Meeting for Public Input, and 15 days after the Director’s Follow-Up Report to the Board is released publicly*

9.2

Notice of Decision on School Accommodation Review


Within 14 days of decision* 9.5

212

APPENDICES

213

Ministry of Education June 26, 2009 Pupil Accommodation Review Guideline Page 1 of 7

MINISTRY OF EDUCATION PUPIL ACCOMMODATION REVIEW GUIDELINE

(Revised June 2009) PURPOSE The purpose of the Pupil Accommodation Review Guideline (previously referred to as school closure guidelines) is to provide direction to school boards regarding public accommodation reviews undertaken to determine the future of a school or group of schools. The Guideline ensures that where a decision is taken by a school board regarding the future of a school, that decision is made with the full involvement of an informed local community and it is based on a broad range of criteria regarding the quality of the learning experience for students. In recognition of the important role schools play in strengthening rural and urban communities and the importance of healthy communities for student success, it is also expected that decisions consider the value of the school to the community, taking into account other government initiatives aimed at strengthening communities. School boards in Ontario are responsible for providing schools and facilities for their students and for operating and maintaining their schools as effectively and efficiently as possible to support student achievement. Under paragraph 26, subsection 8 (1) of the Education Act, the Minister of Education may issue guidelines with respect to school boards’ school closure policies. The Guideline is effective upon release. SCHOOL BOARD ACCOMMODATION REVIEW POLICIES School boards are responsible for establishing and following their own accommodation review policies. At a minimum, boards’ accommodation review policies are to reflect the requirements of the Pupil Accommodation Review Guideline set out below. A copy of the school board’s accommodation review policy, the government’s Pupil Accommodation Review Guideline and the Administrative Review of Accommodation Review Process documents are to be available at the school board’s office and posted on the school board’s website.

214


School boards are expected to undertake long-term enrolment and capital planning that will provide the context for accommodation review processes and decisions. This planning should take into account opportunities for partnerships with other school boards and appropriate public organizations that are financially sustainable, safe for students, and protect the core values and objectives of the school board. The Guideline recognizes that, wherever possible, accommodation reviews should focus on a group of schools within a school board’s planning area rather than examine a single school. These schools would be reviewed together because they are located close enough to the other schools within a planning area to facilitate the development of viable and practical solutions for student accommodation. ACCOMMODATION REVIEW TERMS OF REFERENCE The review of a particular school or schools is to be led by an Accommodation Review Committee (ARC) appointed by the board. The ARC assumes an advisory role and will provide recommendations that will inform the final decision made by the Board of Trustees. Each ARC must include membership drawn from the community. It is recommended that the committee include parents, educators, board officials, and community members. Trustees are not required to serve on ARCs. School boards will provide the ARC with a Terms of Reference that describes the ARC’s mandate. The mandate will refer to the board's educational and accommodation objectives in undertaking the ARC and reflect the board's strategy for supporting student achievement. The Terms of Reference will contain Reference Criteria that frame the parameters of ARC discussion. The Reference Criteria include the educational and accommodation criteria for examining schools under review and accommodation options. Examples may include grade configuration, school utilization, and program offerings. The Terms of Reference will identify ARC membership and the role of voting and non-voting members, including board and school administration. The Terms of Reference will also describe the procedures for the ARC, including meetings; material, support, and analysis to be provided by board administration; and the material to be produced by the ARC. School boards will inform the ARC at the beginning of the process about partnership opportunities, or lack thereof, as identified as part of boards’ long-term planning process. SCHOOL INFORMATION PROFILE School boards are required to develop a School Information Profile to help the ARC and the community understand how well school(s) meet the objectives and the Reference Criteria outlined in the Terms of Reference. The School

215


Information Profile includes data for each of the following four considerations about the school(s): Value to the student Value to the school board Value to the community Value to the local economy

It is recognized that the school’s value to the student takes priority over other considerations about the school. A School Information Profile will be completed by board administration for each of the schools under review. If multiple schools within the same planning area are being reviewed together, the same Profile must be used for each school. The completed School Information Profile(s) will be provided to the ARC to discuss, consult on, modify based on new or improved information, and finalize. The following are examples of factors that may be considered under each of the four considerations. Boards and ARCs may introduce other factors that could be used to reflect local circumstances and priorities, which may help to further understand the school(s). Value to the Student the learning environment at the school; student outcomes at the school; course and program offerings; extracurricular activities and extent of student participation; the ability of the school’s physical space to support student learning; the ability of the school’s grounds to support healthy physical activity and

extracurricular activities; accessibility of the school for students with disabilities; safety of the school; proximity of the school to students/length of bus ride to school.

Value to the School Board student outcomes at the school; course and program offerings; availability of specialized teaching spaces; condition and location of school; value of the school if it is the only school within the community; fiscal and operational factors (e.g., enrolment vs. available space, cost to

operate the school, cost of transportation, availability of surplus space in adjacent schools, cost to upgrade the facility so that it can meet student learning objectives).

Value to the Community facility for community use;

216


program offerings at the school that serve both students and community members (e.g., adult ESL);

school grounds as green space and/or available for recreational use; school as a partner in other government initiatives in the community; value of the school if it is the only school within the community.

Value to the Local Economy school as a local employer; availability of cooperative education; availability of training opportunities or partnerships with business; attracts or retains families in the community; value of the school if it is the only school within the community.

ACCOMMODATION REVIEW PROCESS As indicated above, the public review of each school or group of schools is to be led by a local Accommodation Review Committee appointed by the board. School boards must present to the ARC at least one alternative accommodation option that addresses the objectives and Reference Criteria outlined in the Terms of Reference. The option(s) will address where students would be accommodated; what changes to existing facilities may be required; what programs would be available to students; and transportation. If the option(s) require new capital investment, board administration will advise on the availability of funding, and where no funding exists, will propose how students would be accommodated if funding does not become available. The Ministry recommends that, wherever possible, schools should only be subject to an accommodation review once in a five-year period, unless there are exceptional circumstances. School Information Profile The ARC will discuss and consult about the School Information Profile(s) prepared by board administration for the school(s) under review and modify the Profile(s) where appropriate. This discussion is intended to familiarize the ARC members and the community with the school(s) in light of the objectives and Reference Criteria outlined in the Terms of Reference. The final School Information Profile(s) and the Terms of Reference will provide the foundation for discussion and analysis of accommodation options. Public Information and Access School boards and ARCs are to ensure that all information relevant to the accommodation review, as defined by the ARC, is made public by posting it in a prominent location on the school board’s website or making it available in print upon request. Where relevant information is technical in nature, it is to be explained in plain language.

217


Accommodation Options The ARC may also create alternative accommodation options, which should be consistent with the objectives and Reference Criteria outlined in the Terms of Reference. Board administration will provide necessary data to enable the ARC to examine options. This analysis will assist the ARC in finalizing the Accommodation Report to the board. ARCs may recommend accommodation options that include new capital investment. In such a case, board administration will advise on the availability of funding. Where no funding exists, the ARC with the support of board administration will propose how students would be accommodated if funding does not become available. As the ARC considers the accommodation options, the needs of all students in schools of the ARC are to be considered objectively and fairly, based on the School Information Profile and the objectives and Reference Criteria outlined in the Terms of Reference. Community Consultation and Public Meetings Once an accommodation review has been initiated, the ARC must ensure that a wide range of school and community groups is invited to participate in the consultation. These groups may include the school(s)’ councils, parents, guardians, students, school staff, the local community, and other interested parties. As indicated above, the ARC will consult about the customized School Information Profile prepared by board administration and may make changes as a result of the consultation. The ARC will also seek input and feedback about the accommodation options and the ARC’s Accommodation Report to the board. Discussions will be based on the School Information Profile(s) and the ARC’s Terms of Reference. Public meetings must be well publicized, in advance, through a range of methods and held at the school(s) under review, if possible, or in a nearby facility if physical accessibility cannot be provided at the school(s). Public meetings are to be structured to encourage an open and informed exchange of views. All relevant information developed to support the discussions at the consultation is to be made available in advance. At a minimum, ARCs are required to hold four public meetings to consult about the School Information Profile, the accommodation options, and the ARC Accommodation Report. Minutes reflecting the full range of opinions expressed at the meetings are to be kept, and made publicly available. ARCs and board administration are to respond to questions they consider relevant to the ARC and its analysis, at

218


meetings or in writing appended to the minutes of the meeting and made available on the board’s website. ARC Accommodation Report to the Board The ARC will produce an Accommodation Report that will make accommodation recommendation(s) consistent with the objectives and Reference Criteria outlined in the Terms of Reference. It will deliver its Accommodation Report to the board’s Director of Education, who will have the Accommodation Report posted on the board’s website. The ARC will present its Accommodation Report to the Board of Trustees. Board administration will examine the ARC Accommodation Report and present the administration analysis and recommendations to the Board of Trustees. The Board of Trustees will make the final decision regarding the future of the school(s). If the Board of Trustees votes to close a school or schools, the board must outline clear timelines around when the school(s) will close. TIMELINES FOR AN ACCOMMODATION REVIEW PROCESS After the intention to conduct an accommodation review of a school or schools has been announced by the school board, there must be no less than 30 calendar days notice prior to the first of a minimum of four public meetings. Beginning with the first public meeting, the public consultation period must be no less than 90 calendar days. After the ARC completes its Accommodation Report it is to make the document publicly available and submit the document to the school board administration. After the submission of the Accommodation Report, there must be no less than 60 calendar days notice prior to the meeting where the Board of Trustees will vote on the recommendations. Summer vacation, Christmas break and Spring break, including adjacent weekends, must not be considered part of the 30, 60 or 90 calendar day periods. For schools with a year-round calendar, any holiday that is nine calendar days or longer, including weekends, should not be considered part of the 30, 60 or 90 calendar day periods. APPLICATION OF ACCOMMODATION REVIEW GUIDELINES The Guideline applies to schools offering elementary or secondary regular day-school programs. The following outlines circumstances where school boards are not obligated to undertake an accommodation review in accordance with this Pupil Accommodation Review Guideline. In these circumstances, a board is expected to consult with local communities about proposed accommodation options for students in advance of any decision by the board. Where a replacement school is to be rebuilt by the board on the existing site,

or rebuilt or acquired within the existing school attendance boundary as identified through the board’s existing policies;

219


When a lease is terminated;

When a board is planning the relocation in any school year or over a number

of school years of a grade or grades, or a program, where the enrolment constitutes less than 50% of the enrolment of the school; this calculation is based on the enrolment at the time of the relocation or the first phase of a relocation carried over a number of school years;

When a board is repairing or renovating a school, and the school community

must be temporarily relocated to ensure the safety of students during the renovations

Where a facility has been serving as a holding school for a school

community whose permanent school is over-capacity and/or is under construction or repair.

220

MINISTRY OF EDUCATION ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW OF ACCOMMODATION REVIEW PROCESS

A review of a school board’s accommodation review process may be sought if the following conditions are met. An individual or individuals must: Submit a copy of the board’s accommodation review policy highlighting how the

accommodation review process was not compliant with the school board’s accommodation review policy.

Demonstrate the support of a portion of the school community through the completion of a petition signed by a number of supporters equal to at least 30% of the affected school's student headcount (e.g., if the headcount is 150, then 45 signatures would be required). Parents/guardians of students and/or other individuals that participated in the accommodation review process are eligible to sign the petition1

o The petition should clearly provide a space for individuals to print and sign their name; address (street name and postal code); and to indicate whether they are a parent/guardian of a student attending the school subject to the accommodation review, or an individual who has participated in the review process.

Submit the petition and justification to the school board and the Minister of Education within thirty (30) days of the board’s closure resolution.

The school board would be required to: Confirm to the Minister of Education that the names on the petition are

parents/guardians of students enrolled at the affected school and/or individuals who participated in the review process.

Prepare a response to the individual’s or individuals’ submission regarding the process and forward the board’s response to the Minister of Education within thirty (30) days of receiving the petition.

If the conditions set out above have been met, the Ministry would be required to: Undertake a review by appointing a facilitator to determine whether the school board

accommodation review process was undertaken in a manner consistent with the board’s accommodation review policy within thirty (30) days of receiving the school board’s response.

1 Information contained in the petition is subject to the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act, 1990.

221

ACCOMMODATION REVIEW COMMITTEE TERMS OF REFERENCE (TOR) Appendix C Policy I-9

PAGE 1 OF 5

The Terms of Reference (TOR) were developed in accordance with the Ministry’s 2009 revised Pupil Accommodation Review Guidelines (PARG).

1.0 MANDATE OF THE ARC

1.1 With school valuation as its focus and the Board’s strategy for supporting student achievement, the ARC is to lead the public review and act in an advisory role that will study, report and provide recommendations on accommodation option(s) with respect to the group of schools or school being reviewed for the Board of Trustees’ consideration and decision.

1.2 A separate ARC shall be established for each group of schools being studied.

1.3 This ARC is charged with the review of the following schools:

[Insert List of School(s)]

2.0 MEMBERSHIP OF THE ARC

2.1 The ARC should consist of the following persons:

The Superintendent of School Services or designate;

The Superintendent of Facility Management Services or designate;

Administrator of Planning Services or designate;

The Principal from each affected school;

One (1) Catholic School Council-approved parent representatives from each affected school. If only one school is being reviewed then the representatives may be increased to two (2);

One (1) teaching representative from each affected school;

A member of the community representing a specific interest or school community;

A Parish representative in the community under review or designate;

An external Facilitator hired by the Board.

2.2 Where three (3) or more schools are being reviewed, ARC membership may be adjusted so that the Committee does not become too large to function effectively.

2.3 All members of the ARC are voting members with the exception of the Superintendent of Facility Management Services or designate, and the Superintendent of School Services or designate, the Administrator of Planning Services or designate, and the Facilitator who are non-voting members.

2.4 Recognizing the value of the ARC’s contribution to the Board’s ability to provide quality educational opportunities for its students, ARC members must be prepared to make a commitment to attend all, or nearly all of the working meetings and public meetings

2.5 In the event that an ARC member is unable to commit to attending all, or nearly all of the meetings, the ARC Chair has the authority to address the attendance issue and recommend a solution.

2.6 The ARC will have resource staff available to provide information requested or to provide expertise not already within the ARC. The following are available resources:

Principals of the affected schools.

Administrative support for minute taking.

Dedicated resources to enable the ARC to understand the issues that exist and to provide: o support to ensure compliance with the Board’s policy and procedure; o information relevant to the mandate of the ARC as requested by the ARC; o information relevant to the mandate of the ARC to support community questions or

requests;

2.6.1 If the ARC Chair sees a need for additional expertise or if additional expertise is requested by the ARC, guest ARC Resources may be invited to attend specified meetings.

2.7 The ARC will be deemed to be properly constituted whether or not all of the listed members are able to 222


PAGE 2 OF 5

participate.

2.7.1 Written invitation to participate on the ARC will be issued with a deadline date for acceptance. A nil response by that date will be considered as non-acceptance.

3.0 OPERATION OF THE ARC

3.1 The Director will appoint the Superintendent of Schools Services or designate as the ARC Chair. The Superintendent of Facility Management Services or designate will function as Secretary and resource person.

The ARC Chair is responsible for:

Convening and chairing ARC meetings; Managing the development of the process according to the ARC mandate, the Terms

of Reference and the supporting SIP; Coordination of the activities of the ARC, requesting support, resources, and

information relevant to the ARC’s mandate from the HCDSB staff; Ensuring completion of the ARC Accommodation Report.

.

3.2 A SIP for each affected school necessary to permit the ARC to carry out its mandate will be provided at or prior to the ARCs first working meeting.

3.3 For each affected school the SIP will include the following and will be made available to the public via a posting on the Board’s website and in print format at the Catholic Education Centre upon request:

The section of the Board’s most recent Long-Term Capital Plan that deals with the municipality or area under review;

Relevant background information regarding the schools located within the area of the accommodation review.

3.4 The ARC will meet as often as required to review and analyze all pertinent data and prepare for the mandatory public meetings. Working meetings of the ARC shall be open for observation only by the public.

3.5 The ARC shall determine a schedule of dates, times and location of meetings. This should be established at the first meeting of the ARC subject to Provision 3.7 of Appendix C and Section 11.0 of this Policy.

3.6 Working meetings of the ARC may be held regardless of all voting members being present.

3.7 The ARC will complete its work within the timelines outlined in this Policy.

3.8 In the event that a member is unable to fulfill his/her duties on the ARC, the Principal of the affiliated

school(s) working with the Chair of the ARC, may co-opt another representative. If a replacement cannot be found, the ARC will continue to function.

3.9 The ARC will provide information to the affected school communities on an ongoing basis.

3.10 Board staff will respond to reasonable requests for additional information from the ARC and will include the response(s) to the question(s), in the ARC’s working binder under the appropriate section, and will post the responses on the Board’s website.

3.11 Requests for information in keeping with the ARC’s mandate and in keeping with the schools under review, will be provided by ARC Resource staff in a timely manner for the ARC’s use and if the information is requested from an external party, for the ARC’s approval. It may not always be possible to obtain responses to requests for information in time for the next scheduled meeting. If this occurs, ARC Resource staff will provide an estimated availability time.

3.12 All ARC meetings will be structured to encourage an open and informed exchange of views.

4.0 REFERENCE CRITERIA

4.1 In accordance with the PARG, the Reference Criteria is to frame the parameters of the ARC discussion, which will lead to the development of the ARC Accommodation Report. The Reference 223


PAGE 3 OF 5

Criteria is to help the ARC assess: 1) The current situation, if the situation was left unchanged and; 2) How the situation may improve if accommodation option(s) were implemented.

4.1.1 CURRENT SITUATION - The ARC is to examine the school(s) under review from the

perspective of the following criteria (see bullets in 4.1.2 below) as the criteria relates to the current situation and the projected situation (both physical and educational).

4.1.2 ACCOMMODATION OPTION(S) PROPOSED - The ARC is also to examine the school(s)

under review using the following criteria to assess the feasibility of the potential accommodation option(s) being recommended.

Declining school or program enrolments which currently impact or may limit a student's

educational and social opportunity; The absence of sufficient instructional space within a school or a group of schools (which

may impact a student's access to programming and physical resources e.g., gym, library); The presence of surplus instructional space within a school or a group of schools; The physical condition of a school or a group of schools which may impact the quality of

the learning environment and/or limited financial resources of the Board.

4.2 The ARC may add additional reference criteria.

5.0 WORKING MEETINGS

5.1 The goal of the working meetings is to ensure that information is prepared for presentation at each of the minimum four public meetings. The materials prepared will support the objectives and the Reference Criteria of this TOR and will help the ARC in its development of the ARC Accommodation Report.

5.2 The ARC Resource staff will work with the ARC to prepare all working meeting and Public Meeting

agendas and materials. Meeting agendas and materials are to be made available by e-mail to the ARC members and posted on the Board’s website when possible at least 24 hours in advance of the scheduled meeting.

5.3 ARC Resource staff will ensure that accurate minutes are recorded. These minutes are to reflect the

discussions that take place and decisions that are made at working meetings and at Public Meetings. ARC meeting minutes will be posted to the Board’s website after the minutes have been approved by the ARC.

5.4 All information provided to the ARC is to be posted on the board’s website and made available in hard copy if requested.

5.6 Working Meetings of the ARC shall be open to observation by the public.

6.0 PUBLIC MEETINGS

6.1 In addition to ARC working meetings, the ARC will hold a minimum of four (4) public meetings. Public meetings will occur in one of the affected schools, provided the school is an accessible facility, or at an alternate facility within the local community. These meetings will be organized as follows:

At the first public meeting, the ARC will present the Preliminary School Accommodation Review Report prepared by the Director, including the Board/Staff proposed alternative accommodation option(s). As well, the ARC will describe the TOR, including its mandate; outline its study process; give the public a briefing on the data and issues to be addressed and receive community input;

At the second public meeting, the ARC will present a completed SIP (refer to Appendix D) for the school(s) under consideration and receive community input;

At the third public meeting, the ARC will present the accommodation option(s) and request community input;

At the fourth public meeting, the ARC will present to the public, the draft ARC Accommodation Report with its interim accommodation recommendation(s) and receive community input. The 224


PAGE 4 OF 5

ARC may make changes to the report based upon feedback at this meeting.

6.2 The ARC Chair will call the first public meeting no earlier than thirty (30) calendar days after the date of its appointment.

6.3 Notice of the first public meeting will be provided no less than thirty (30) calendar days in advance of the meeting. A minimum of fourteen (14) calendar days notice will be provided in respect of other public meetings.

6.4 Public notice of the public meetings will be provided through school newsletters, letters to the school community, the Board’s website and advertisements in local community newspapers, and will include date, time, location, purpose, contact name and email address.

7.0 ARC ACCOMMODATION REPORT

7.1 The ARC Accommodation Report which is a mandatory outcome of the ARC’s work, is to be submitted to the Director, by the Chair of the ARC. The ARC Accommodation Report is to be drafted in plain language.

7.1.1 The ARC will prepare a report that will make accommodation recommendation(s) consistent with the objectives and Reference Criteria outlined in the TOR.

7.1.2 The ARC should also consider the following issues and try to address these as well as possible in the ARC Accommodation Report:

The implications for the program for students both in the school under consideration for consolidation, closure or program relocation and in the school(s) where programs may be affected.

The effects of consolidation, closure or program relocation on the following: o The attendance area defined for the school(s) o Attendance at the other school(s) o The need and extent of transportation

The financial effects of consolidating or not consolidating the school, including any capital

implications.

Savings expected to be achieved as a result of the consolidation, closure or program relocation:

o School operations (heating, lighting, cleaning, routine maintenance) o Expenditures to address school renewal issues which will no longer be required

Revenue implications as a result of the consolidation, closure or program relocation.

Additional expenditures, if any, at schools which will accommodate students displaced as a

result of a consolidation, closure or program relocation decision taken by the Board: o School operations (heating, lighting, cleaning, routine maintenance) o School administration o School renewal o Transportation

Net savings/costs associated with but not limited to the following:

o Teaching staff o Paraprofessionals o Transportation

The possible alternative use or disposition of an empty building.

7.1.3 The ARC will deliver its Accommodation Report to the Director not earlier than ninety (90) calendar days and not later than one hundred and twenty (120) calendar days after the beginning of the ARC’s first public meeting. The Director will post the ARC Accommodation Report on the Board’s website.

7.1.4 The ARC shall present the ARC Accommodation Report to the Board of Trustees. 225


PAGE 5 OF 5

8.0 CAPITAL PLANNING OBJECTIVES AND PARTNERSHIP OPPORTUNITIES 8.1 The Board is to outline its capital planning objectives for the area under review in order to provide the

ARC with context for the accommodation review processes and decisions.

The Board is to provide five-year enrolment projections, by grade, for each school included in the review. In addition, if requested by the ARC, longer-term enrolment projections and/or school-age population data for the subject review area will be provided in order to support effective decision-making by the ARC.

These capital planning objectives should take into account opportunities for partnerships with other school boards and appropriate public organizations that are financially sustainable, safe for students, and protect the core values and objectives of the school board.

The Board is to inform the ARC of such known or reasonably anticipated partnership opportunities, or lack thereof, at the beginning of the ARC process.

9.0 ALTERNATIVE ACCOMMODATION OPTION(S) BY THE BOARD 9.1 The Board must present at least one alternative accommodation option that addresses the objectives

and the Reference Criteria outlined in the TOR.

9.2 Where the Board’s proposed alternative accommodation option(s) include new capital investment, the Board staff will advise the ARC on the availability of funding. Where no funding exists, Board staff will propose how students would be accommodated if funding does not become available.

9.3 The ARC may create alternative accommodation option(s), consistent with the objectives and

Reference Criteria outlined above.

9.4 ARC Resource Staff will provide the necessary data to enable the ARC to examine the options proposed. This analysis is necessary to assist the ARC in finalizing the ARC Accommodation Report to the Director.

9.5 Where the ARC recommends accommodation option(s) that include new capital investment, the ARC

Chair will advise the ARC on the availability of funding. Where no funding exists, the ARC, will propose how students would be accommodated if funding does not become available. ARC Resource staff will provide analysis support for this process.

9.6 All accommodation options developed by the Board or by the ARC are to address, at a minimum,

where students would be accommodated; changes that may be required to existing facilities; program availability and transportation.

226

SCHOOL INFORMATION PROFILE (SIP) Appendix D Policy I-9

PAGE 1 OF 8

The Halton Catholic District School Board is required by the 2009 revised Pupil Accommodation Review Guidelines (PARG) to develop a School Information Profile (SIP) and complete the SIP for each school under review and deliver to the ARC.

The ARC will discuss and consult about the SIP prepared by the Board for the schools under review and modify the profiles where appropriate. ARCs are encouraged to introduce other factors that could be used to reflect the local circumstances and priorities which may help to further educate the community about the schools. This discussion is intended to familiarize the ARC members and the community with the schools in light of the objectives and reference criteria set out in the TOR. The final SIP and the TOR will provide the foundation for discussion and analysis of accommodation options. Planning Area: School Name: Address: Program Offering

Regular Track French Immersion Specialized (please provide type) Other (please specify) School Information

Year Constructed Size of permanent structure in m2 Site Size in hectares

Green Space Size in hectares School Ministry Rated Capacity # of Portables Availability of Parking Student drop-off and pick-up area on site (Y/N) Bus-loop (Y/N) Number of Classrooms List Specialized Spaces (e.g., Gym, Science Room, etc.) Accessibility (provide information indicating areas of accessibility, e.g., ramp, washroom, etc.

List available outdoor play areas (e.g., soccer field, track, playground)

Partnerships with Community Groups List Groups using the school or grounds List Community Tenants (e.g., Child Care Centre)

Staffing Current Impact over next 5 years

# of students bused # of students that walk # of out of area students List of course offering available in addition to the Core Curriculum requirements

What programs if any, does the school have to support student success

Student achievement data: Provision of EQAO report for current year and other measures Board may have in use

What pathways does the school offer (e.g., independent living, work, apprenticeship, college, university)?

227


PAGE 2 OF 8

School Information

What specialist high-skills majors does the school offer? What is the expectation of expansion on the specialist high-skills major given the enrolment projections for the school?

List of extra-curricular activities available List of co-curricular activities available List of before and/or after school programs (e.g., Breakfast Club) Proximity of school to Parish Is the school used as a Parish (rural areas or areas where Parish space is limited)

Financial Analysis of School Cost

Current Per pupil cost to operate the school (administration, operating and maintenance)

5-year projected per pupil cost to operate the school (administration, operating and maintenance)

Current transportation cost 5-year projected transportation cost Board average per pupil cost to operate a school (administration, operating and maintenance)

Board average transportation cost Replacement Value of the School Building Current Cost of needed Repairs (ReCAPP data) Current Facilities Condition Index (FCI) Cost of needed Repairs over the next 5 years Projected FCI at end of 5-year period 5-Year Historic Enrolment by Program, summed to the school level: Program

Insert Yr. 1

Insert Yr. 2

Insert Yr. 3

Insert Yr. 4

Insert Yr. 5

Total Enrolment: Utilization:

Actual enrolment for current year and projected enrolment (5 years) by Program, summed to the school level: Program

Current Year

Insert Yr. 1

Insert Yr. 2

Insert Yr. 3

Insert Yr. 4

Insert Yr. 5

Total: Utilization:

Using the information provided above, consider the following: 1.0 Value to the Student 1.1 How are programs impacted by the enrolment trend at the school? – consider the past five years, the

current year, and the projected 5 years.

228


PAGE 3 OF 8

1.2 How are extracurricular and/or co-curricular activities impacted by the enrolment trend at the school? Consider the past five years, the current year, and the projected 5 years.

1.3 What would the impact be to the students if this school were to close from the perspective of such

issues as program delivery, extra-curricular co-curricular activities and transportation? 1.4 What type of classroom/school organization is possible with the eligible staffing allocation? 1.5 What safety measures are in place at the school (e.g., security cameras)? 1.6 How does the physical configuration of the building support or not support program offering (e.g., gym,

library allocation)? 1.7 How does student achievement at the school compare to the Board Average, the Provincial Average? 1.8 Does the school have before and/or after school programs to address the needs of students at risk? 1.9 What opportunities are available to the students due to the location of the school and its proximity to

existing community facilities? 1.10 What Parish opportunities are available to the students due to the proximity of the Parish or the Parish’s involvement at the school?

229


PAGE 4 OF 8

2.0 Value to the Board 2.1 Considering the condition and location of the school, what upgrades/major repairs to the building need

to be addressed? Please list and provide estimated costs and timing of proposed upgrades/major repairs.

2.2 Describe the condition of the school grounds – if repairs are required, please list and provide estimated

costs and timing of proposed repairs. 2.3 Is there room on the site for a permanent addition or for portables?

2.4 What is the proximity of the school to the local Parish and/or other Catholic schools?

2.5 How does the cost to operate the school today compare to the board average? 2.6 How does the current transportation cost compare to the board average? 2.7 How are programs impacted by the enrolment trend at the school? – consider the past five years, the

current year, and the projected 5 years. 2.8 What would the impact be to the Board if this school were to close? Assess the response based on

the location of the school (e.g., only school in the community, rural school, location of Parish, operating and transportation costs, savings etc.)

230


PAGE 5 OF 8

2.9 How does the physical configuration of the building support or not support program offering (e.g., gym,

library allocation)? 2.10 How does student achievement at the school compare to the Board Average, the Provincial Average?

2.11 Does the school have before and/or after school programs to address the needs of students at risk?

2.12 How does the staffing model at the school compare to other schools of the Board?

231


PAGE 6 OF 8

3.0 Value to the Community 3.1 Is the school frequently used as a community resource/support or as a Parish resource/support? If

yes, please list uses. 3.2 Are any of the supports listed above transferable to another location within the board’s schools to

ensure continued community/Parish supports are in place? 3.3 Is the school the only school in the community? 3.4 Is the school or the school grounds used for community use before and/or after school? If yes, please

list groups using the school or grounds. 3.5 Does the school offer a range of programs that serve not only the students but also the community

(e.g., adult ESL)? If yes, please list programs. 3.6 Is the school involved in a longterm community commitment (e.g, child care centre, Parish)? If yes,

please identify the commitment and indicate if there are alternative sites to support the commitment should the school close.

3.7 Is the school of historical significance to the community?

232


PAGE 7 OF 8

4.0 Value to the Local Economy 4.1 Does the location of the school attract or retain families in the community? 4.2 Does the school contribute to the community vitality? If yes, please explain? 4.3 Is this the only school in the community? If yes, please explain the impact on the community if the

school were to close. 4.4 Are there training opportunities or partnership opportunities involving the school and local businesses?

If yes, please list.

233


PAGE 8 OF 8

SIP Conclusion/Summary Board Staff are to summarize the Profile based on the responses to the questions. The Summary should address/provide:

Impact of the school remaining open: How would it affect the students, the community, the Board and the local economy with particular emphasis on the impact on students, and;

Description of the benefits if the planning area situation were improved through consolidation/closure,

etc. with specific emphasis placed on the benefits to the students and describe the impact on the community, the Board and the local economy.

234

ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE HALTON CATHOLIC DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD

SCHOOL ACCOMMODATION - Administrative Procedure No.: VI-35 CONSOLIDATION/CLOSURE Date: May 31, 2004 Amended: March 3, 2009 Amended: May 17, 2010

Page 1 of 3

PURPOSE

To outline the procedures that are required under Section 12 of Board Operating Policy I-9 for School Accommodation Review – Consolidation/Closure and to clarify roles and responsibilities for implementation of the Policy.

APPLICATION & SCOPE This procedure applies to any exercise of Operating Policy I-9 as it applies to all schools within the jurisdiction of the Halton Catholic District School Board (HCDSB). The Director of Education or designate is responsible for ensuring implementation of these administrative procedures.

REQUIREMENTS

1.0 SCHOOL ACCOMMODATION UTILIZATION REVIEW

1.1 The Superintendent of Facility Management Services, in collaboration with the Superintendent of Business Services, the Superintendent of School Services and the Administrator, Planning Services shall review, as required, the Board’s system-wide accommodation utilization and identify potential school consolidations and/or reviews of school boundaries. The review shall be undertaken in accordance with the provisions outlined in Section 1.0 of Operating Policy I-9.

1.2 The following factors may indicate that a School Accommodation Utilization Review should be undertaken:

A school, or group of schools, is unable to provide a suitable and equitable range of learning opportunities for students;

A school, or group of schools, has experienced or will experience an adverse impact on learning opportunities for students due to declining enrolment;

Reorganization involving a school or group of schools could enhance program and learning opportunities for students;

Teaching/learning spaces are not suitable to provide the programs needed to serve the community and retrofitting may be cost prohibitive;

Under normal staffing allocation practices, it would be necessary to assign three grades to one class in one or more schools;

One or more of the schools is experiencing higher building maintenance expenses than the average for the system and/or is in need of major capital improvements;

In respect of one or more of the schools there are safety and/or environmental concerns related to or connected with the building, the school site or its locality;

The consolidation of schools is in the best interest of the students and the overall school system; It has been no less than five years since the inception of a study of the school by an

Accommodation Review Committee, except where extenuating circumstances warrant, such as an unexpected economic or demographic shift, or a change in a school’s physical condition.

2.0 PRELIMINARY SCHOOL ACCOMMODATION REVIEW REPORT

2.1 The Preliminary School Accommodation Review Report will identify a school or group of schools, where the circumstances are such that there is a need to consider the possible consolidation, closure or major program relocation in respect to one or more of the subject schools.

Appendix F

235



Page 2 of 3

2.2 The Administrator, Planning Services and the Superintendent of Facility Management Services will provide the following information to assist in the development of the report:

School Name(s); Ministry rated On The Ground (OTG) capacity; Any changes to the OTG capacity including Year of Change; 5-year historical Average Daily Enrolment (ADE); 5-year projected ADE; Percentage of utilization for each year (ADE/OTG); Additional information as required.

2.3 The report will be authored by the Superintendent of Facility Management Services, with the assistance of the Superintendent of Business Services, the Superintendent of School Services and the Administrator, Planning Services and will contain at least one alternative accommodation option for the students in the subject schools. The review shall be undertaken in accordance with the provisions outlined in Section 2.0 of Operating Policy I-9.

3.0 DECISION TO ESTABLISH AND FORMATION OF THE ACCOMMODATION REVIEW COMMITTEE (ARC)

3.1 If the Board of Trustees decision is to direct the formation of an ARC, Parents/Guardians, Staff and Catholic School Council members of the potentially affected schools will be informed, by the Board in accordance with the provisions outlined in Section 3.0 of Operating Policy I-9. Communications Services will act as a resource to the ARC for the publication of all ARC-approved/ARC-related documents.

3.2 The Director of Education will direct staff to invite membership of the Accommodation Review Committee(s) in accordance with Section 3.0 of Operating Policy I-9.

4.0 INFORMATION TO THE ARC

4.1 Members of the ARC will be provided with the information outlined in Section 4.0 of Operating Policy I-9. The Superintendent of School Services will direct the Superintendent of Facility Management Services and the Administrator, Planning Services to coordinate the information that is to be provided to the ARC.

5.0 ARC Accommodation Report

5.1 The ARC, through a series of working meetings and a minimum of four (4) public meetings, will develop and analyze accommodation option(s) and prepare an ARC Accommodation Report with accommodation recommendation(s).

5.2 The recommendation(s) may include continuing operations, boundary changes, school closures or other options deemed appropriate, provided they are consistent with the objectives and Reference Criteria outlined in the Terms of Reference set out in Section 4 of Appendix C of Operating Policy I-9.

5.3 The ARC will deliver its Report in accordance with the timelines outlined in Section 11.0 of Operating Policy I-9.

6.0 DIRECTOR’S REPORT

6.1 Administrative Council will review the ARC Accommodation Report and the Superintendent of Facility Management Services will present Administration’s analysis and recommendations to the Board of Trustees via the Director’s Report.

6.2 The report will be drafted by the Superintendent of Facility Management Services with the assistance of the Superintendent of Business Services and the Administrator, Planning Services, for the consideration and approval of the Director. The Director’s Report and recommendation(s) will be prepared in

236



Page 3 of 3

accordance with Section 6.0 of Operating Policy I-9.

7.0 BOARD MEETING FOR PUBLIC INPUT

7.1 In addition to the public input sought through the work of the ARC, the Board will hold a Meeting for Public Input to provide an opportunity for the public to make formal representations to the Board concerning the Director’s Report and the ARC Accommodation Report. This meeting will be held in accordance with the provisions outlined in Section 7.0 of Operating policy I-9.

8.0 DIRECTOR’S FOLLOW-UP REPORT TO THE BOARD

8.1 Following the Board Meeting for Public Input, the Director’s Follow-Up Report to the Board will be drafted by the Superintendent of Facility Management Services with the assistance of the Superintendent of Business Services and the Administrator, Planning Services, for the consideration and approval of the Director.

8.2 The Director’s Follow-Up Report to the Board, reporting on and responding to the representations made by the public at the Board Meeting for Public Input, will be prepared in accordance with Section 8.0 of Operating Policy I-9.

9.0 BOARD MEETING TO DECIDE ON SCHOOL ACCOMMODATION

9.1 In accordance with Section 9.0 of Operating Policy I-9, the Board of Trustees will make its decision regarding the school accommodation recommendation(s) addressed in the ARC Accommodation Report, the Director’s Report and the Director’s Follow-Up Report to the Board.

9.2 The Board of Trustees may make any accommodation decision it deems advisable in relation to the school(s) under review by an ARC regardless of the ARC’s recommendation(s).

Approved: Regular Meeting of the Administrative Council Authorized by:

M. W. Pautler, Director of Education & Secretary of the Board Date: …………………………………………………………

237

OPERATING POLICY HALTON CATHOLIC DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD Facility Partnership POLICY NO.: I-37 DATE: November 20, 2012 AMENDED:

Approved: November 20, 2012

PURPOSE

The Facility Partnership Policy provides a framework for the development of facility partnership opportunities with community partners whose missions enhance and respect the autonomy and denominational rights of the Board.

APPLICATION & SCOPE

The Facility Partnership Policy applies to sharing space in open and operating school buildings and administrative facilities owned by the Board and any future co-build projects with approved community partners as per the Ministry Encouraging Partnership Memorandum 2010:B1 issued February 11, 2010.

Partnerships developed in accordance with this Policy are to benefit the Board, students and the community and are to optimize the use of the facilities owned by the Board.

This Policy does not apply where the Board has declared space surplus in accordance with Ontario Regulation 444/98.

PRINCIPLES

• The Board recognizes that its primary responsibility is to support the health and safety of students and

staff, and the spiritual and intellectual development of students.

• The Board recognizes that it is the responsibility of all levels of government to make the best use of public assets.

• The Board recognizes that cooperative and collaborative partnerships are part of the foundation of a

strong, vibrant and sustainable publicly funded education system and that effective partnerships must respect the core values of each partner.

• The Board recognizes that the development of facility partnerships with other entities may serve to

strengthen the role of schools in communities, provide a place for programs and facilitate the coordination of services for students and the wider community.

• The Board, in its sole discretion, shall identify which schools may and may not be suitable and

available for facility partnerships and what entities are acceptable as community partners in existing or planned facilities.

• Entities that provide competing education services, private schools or colleges and credit offering

entities that are not government funded are not eligible partners.

• Operation and maintenance of the space will be carried out on a cost recovery basis to the Board.

• Facility Partnership agreements will be facilitated with the partner and reviewed on an annual basis, subject to the needs of the school and the needs of the Board.

Appendix G

238



• Partnerships will not prevent the Board from building renovating or closing schools or from disposing

of surplus assets when required.

• The Board recognizes that as a publicly funded body and responsible community member, school buildings, facilities, playfields, parking lots, grounds, furniture and equipment should reasonably be made available to eligible applicants for community use where such use does not impede or compromise the educational programs offered in the Board’s schools or interfere with custodial and maintenance work programs, or violate the Board’s Governing Values or the core values of the Catholic Church.

REQUIREMENTS

1.0 Identifying Suitable Space for Partnerships

The Board, in its sole discretion, shall identify which of its open and operating schools will or will not have available unused space that is suitable for facility partnerships; and which future capital projects may present an opportunity for co-building with community partners.

2.0 Co-Building with Community Partners Expressions of interest from Community Partners involving facility partnerships will be made in writing to the Director of Education. Expressions of interest from community partners will be reviewed, evaluated for compatibility with this policy by Board Staff before senior administration makes a recommendation to the Board for the sharing of school space or a co-build facility partnership

3.0 Notification Process

The Board will post information on its website regarding opportunities for the facility partnership and the Board will hold a public meeting once a year to exchange information with interested community partners and the public regarding available spaces and or potential co-build projects.

4.0 Partner Selection

The Board will consider and in its sole discretion determine the eligibility of applicants to become potential partners and the value of the partnership to students, the school and the local Catholic community.

5.0 Cost Recovery and Partnership Agreements

In every instance the entire professional, capital, maintenance, operating cost and applicable taxes associated with developing, constructing and operating the space to be occupied by the partner, including a proportional share of joint-use or shared space will be borne by the partner. This includes capital renewal, land costs and any administrative costs incurred by the Board.

239



APPROVED: Regular Meeting of the Board Authorized by:

Chair of the Board

240

Halton Student Transportation Services (HSTS) 2013-2014 Annual Report Page 1 of 2



HALTON STUDENT TRANSPORTATION SERVICES (HSTS) 2013-2014 ANNUAL REPORT

PURPOSE:

The purpose of this report is to provide the Board with a summary of the year end results from the 2013-2014 Halton Student Transportation Services (HSTS) Annual Report. COMMENTS:

As part of the HSTS Annual General Meeting, HSTS prepares an Annual Report to summarize their yearly activities for transportation services for the two (2) member boards, being the Halton Catholic District School Board (HCDSB) and the Halton District School Board (HDSB). Please note that this annual review is the first since both French boards left the consortium in September 2013. The 2013-2014 Annual Report is attached as Appendix A and contains information based on the August 31, 2014 year-end information. This Annual Report as well as those for the previous five (5) years of operations is available on the HSTS website (http://www.haltonbus.ca/about/).

The 2013-2014 HSTS Annual Report contains a summary of activities the HSTS completed over the 2013-2014 school year. Highlights of these activities are as follows:

1. HSTS contractors transported approximately 29,573 students daily over 448 routes throughout the 2013-2014 school year for an overall transportation cost of $19,318,631 (count date October 31, 2013);

2. Updated Strategic and Operational Plans were approved and adopted;

3. In June 2014, the follow up Effectiveness and Efficiency (E&E) Review was conducted. This consisted of a thorough review of the HSTS Governance and Management Practices, Operating Policies and Procedures, Routing and Technology strategies and Contract Management, which included a review of the HSTS contracting practices and the Contract Performance Management Program. HSTS achieved the highest possible rating in each of the four categories, and now has an Effectiveness and Efficiency rating of ‘High’;

4. HSTS staff were involved in various professional development sessions, further enhancing and upgrading their technical and customer services skills;

5. HSTS continued to focus on timely communications to all stakeholders, including further upgrades of the HSTS website to ensure the high volume of traffic experienced during inclement weather days could be handled;

241

Halton Student Transportation Services (HSTS) 2013-2014 Annual Report Page 2 of 2

6. Several HSTS Operating Procedures were reviewed and revised to reflect changes in legislation or regulations as well as to clarify any operational changes that occurred during the year. One major policy change was a decrease in the walk distance at the secondary panel from 4.0 km to 3.2 km and a decrease in the distance to bus stop from to 1.6 km to 800 m for elementary Early French Immersion and Extended French program students – both boards are now in line with Provincial Averages;

7. School Bus Safety Training programs were provided to every elementary (grade JK-8) school in the Region of Halton;

8. HSTS continued to contract services of four (4) bus companies and four (4) taxi operators to service a total of 448 routes. The contracted bus companies are Attridge Transportation Inc., First Student Canada, Stock Transportation Ltd., and Tyler Transport Ltd. The contracted taxi operators are Burlington/Deluxe Taxi, Oakville United Taxi, A1 Rose Taxi and McKab Taxi;

9. 10% of all school buses under contract with HSTS were audited by an independent auditing firm for driver qualifications, records and reporting, driver logs and hours of service, vehicle maintenance, and driver safety programs and contract/policy compliance;

10. Over the school year, HSTS contracted vehicles travelled 34,058 km daily (6,402,940 km annually);

11. HSTS contractors transported approximately 10,434 HCDSB students at a cost of $5,871,193 (count date October 31, 2013);

12. 81% of all routes are shared between the two boards;

13. Average walk distance to the bus stop for HCDSB students is approximated at 310 meters; and,

14. KPMG Auditors’ Report (contained within the 2013-2014 HSTS Annual Report), is attached to the HSTS Financial Statements for the year ended August 31, 2014 and is a “clean” or unqualified audit opinion.

Lastly, the Halton Student Transportation Services was selected recently by the Auditor General of Ontario (AGO) as one of three exemplary Ontario consortiums to review their business models given recent success following the Effectiveness and Efficiency review. This will allow the AGO to conduct audits of other consortia across Ontario. CONCLUSION:

2013-2014 was a successful year for the HSTS. Through fiscal responsibility, continued optimization of routes, and delivery through the Bus Planner software and in cooperation with contracted bus operators, HSTS continues to strive in improving its efficiency and effectiveness of transportation services for approximately 29,573 students in Halton Region. REPORT PREPARED BY: F. THIBEAULT ADMINISTRATOR, PLANNING SERVICES REPORT SUBMITTED BY: P. MCMAHON


242

2013-2014Annual Report

Appendix A

243

Table of Contents

Director’s Update . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-2

Board of Directors, Mission, Vision. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

2013-14 Highlights . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-6

Key Performance Indicators. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7-10

Auditors’ Report . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11-13

Financial Statements. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15-18

Notes to Financial Statements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19-23

244

Director’s Update

The 2013-2014 Halton Student Transportation Services (HSTS) Annual Report outlines

the successes and initiatives of HSTS as it continues to fulfill its mandate to provide excellent

customer service to eligible students of the Halton District School Board (HDSB) and the Halton

Catholic District School Board (HCDSB). HSTS has achieved its objective of continuous

improvements to their operations by providing:

1. Safe, equitable and inclusive transportation to students deemed eligible for transportation

under each member boards’ Transportation Policy

2. An excellent level of customer service; and,

3. Continually looking for and implementing improvements to the effectiveness

and efficiency of the organization.

In September 2013, the Conseil scolaire de district catholique Centre-Sud and Conseil scolaire

Viamonde withdrew from the HSTS consortium to join Francobus, the French Transportation

Consortium in South Central Ontario. The withdrawal of the French Boards provided

an opportunity for the remaining member boards, the Halton District School Board and the Halton

Catholic District School Board, to undertake a review of the HSTS governance structure

and to update the Strategic and Operational Plans. The Board of Directors updated the Strategic

Plan by revising the goals and future direction for the consortium. The Operational Plan

which was also updated, is a document that provides HSTS staff and the Board of Directors

a ‘roadmap to the future’ to be followed over the next several years.

A few highlights of our sixth year of operations:

• Updated Strategic and Operational Plans were approved and adopted;

• In June 2014 the follow up Effectiveness and Efficiency (E&E) Review was conducted.

This consisted of a thorough review of the HSTS Governance and Management Practices,

Operating Policies and Procedures, Routing and Technology strategies and Contract

Management, which included a review of the HSTS contracting practices and the Contract

Performance Management Program. HSTS achieved the highest possible rating

in each of the four categories, and now has an Effectiveness

and Efficiency rating of ‘High’; 1

Serving the Halton Community

245

• HSTS staff were involved in various professional development sessions, including but not

limited to Advanced Bus Planner Training, GPS Training, Ontario Human Rights Code

and Customer Service Strategies. These sessions provided staff the opportunity to continue

enhancing and upgrading their technical and customer services skills with the continued

goal of providing excellent customer service to all stakeholders;

• HSTS continued to provide relevant communications to stakeholders in the form

of newsletters that were sent to parents, school staff, and bus operators.

• The HSTS website was revised and updated to enhance communication

and to ensure the site and content remains relevant;

• Several HSTS Operating procedures were reviewed and revised to reflect changes

in legislation or regulations as well as to clarify any operational changes that occurred

throughout the year;

• School Bus Safety Training programs were provided to every elementary (grade JK-8)

school in the Region of Halton.

Altogether, the 2013-14 year ended on a high note when the results of the Follow Up Effective-

ness and Efficiency Report were received. The Board of Directors wishes to express their sincere

gratitude to the HSTS staff for their hard work, dedication and commitment to the safe daily

transport of approximately 29,573 students from both member boards in the Halton Region.

Paul McMahon

President,

HSTS Board of Directors

2


246

Board of Directors

Paul McMahon, President

Lucy Veerman, Secretary/Treasurer

Paula Dawson, Director

David Euale, Director

Diane Rabenda, Director

Donald Vrooman, Director

Mission Statement

To provide safe and reliable transportation

services in an effective and efficient manner

to all eligible students in the Halton Student

Transportation Services jurisdiction.

Vision Statement

To provide excellent customer service to all stakeholders:

students, school board personnel, parents, and members of the community

while ensuring students are transported in a safe, accessible and caring environment.

3


247

2013-14 Highlights

Route/Operator Statistics:

HSTS continued to contract the services of four bus companies and four

taxi operators. A total of 448 routes were contracted with the following

four school bus operators:

• Attridge Transportation Inc.

• First Student Canada ULC (Burlington & Georgetown Branches)

• Stock Transportation Ltd.

• Tyler Transport Ltd.

Contract Performance Management Program:

HSTS continues to monitor contract compliance and performance measures

through a formalized Contract Performance Management program (CPM).

The HSTS CPM was designed to mitigate risk and enhance contractor performance

through active contract compliance monitoring and performance measurements.

Bus Operator Audits:

During the 2013-14 school year 10% of all school buses under contract

with HSTS were audited by an independent auditing firm.

Operators are audited on the following categories:

- Driver Qualifications, Records & Reporting

- Driver Logs

- Vehicles/Maintenance

- Safety Programs 4


248

In addition to the third party audits that are performed annually, HSTS staff also performed both

facility and route audits on 10% of the routes.

The HSTS route audits consisted of a review of on-time arrival/departure at bus stops and schools as well

as compliance with the Highway Traffic Act. These audits were performed in a variety of ways such as a

review of GPS data, following the bus, (bus arrival stop time, arrival time at school, adhering to posted

speed limits, etc.), school site visits to confirm arrival/departure times.

The facility audits of each operator consisted of a review of each bus operator’s contractual obligations

such as driver safety training, valid driver First Aid/CPR certification, review of current driver abstracts,

and confirmation of adherence to preventative maintenance schedules.

External Committee Involvement:

HSTS staff continued their active participation on several committees throughout the 2013-14

school year, such as:

• Municipal Crossing Guard Committee

• Bus Planner Technical Committee

• Accessibility Coordinating Committee (HDSB)

• School Year Calendar Committees (HDSB and HCDSB)

• Region of Halton – Active Transportation Master Plan

• Ontario Association of School Business Officials (OASBO)

• OASBO Transportation Committee

• KPI Committee

• OASBO/OSBA Safety Initiatives Committee

5


249

Student Safety Programs:

Ensuring student safety is an ongoing priority at HSTS. To this end, HSTS provided the following

safety programs in the 2013-14 school year:

• School Bus Orientation Day (available to all first time riders)

• The Safe Rider Program - Buster the Bus (grades JK-3)

• The Rider Role Model Program (grades 4-8)

• Annual Trip to the Halton Safety Village (grade 2)

• School Bus Evacuation Program (available to all schools/grades)

Annual Kilometers Travelled:

In 2013-14 Halton Student

Transportation Services

contracted vehicles travelled

34,058 km daily, this equates

6,402,904 km annually.

To put this in perspective,

the circumference of the earth

at the equator is 40,008 km.

In the 2013-14 school buses

under contract with HSTS

travelled approximately

160 times around the earth.

6


250

Key Performance Indicators (KPI’s)

Transportation KPI’s contained within this report are based on a snap shot of data exported

on October 31, 2013 from the HSTS student transportation software, Bus Planner. Student data is

provided to HSTS through a daily download from each board’s student information system, Trillium.

Transportation Costs by Board:

The chart below outlines the 2013-14 transportation costs by member board:

* Transportation costs only, administrative costs are excluded.

7


Halton District School Board

Halton Catholic District School Board

HDSB70%

HCDSB30% $6,027,596

$13,447,438

Transportation Costs by Board$19,318,631*

251

Transported Students by Board:

In the 2013-14 school year HSTS transported 18,834 HDSB students and 10,434 HCDSB students.

The chart below outlines the number of students transported by member board, year over year

from the 2011-12 through 2013-14 school years:

Shared Board Routes:

HSTS continues to maximize efficiencies through run/route sharing. The chart below outlines

the percentage of routes that are shared; the majority of routes continue to be shared.

* Route sharing data is based on 448 routes

8


0

5000

10000

15000

20000

HCDSBHDSB

2013-20142012-20132011-2012

Two Board Routes

81%

Single Board Routes

19%

85 Routes

363 Routes

252

9


Average Distance to Stop:

The chart below depicts the average distance to the bus stop by board for students in grades JK-8:

*Excludes students with special needs

Vehicle Utilization:

Vehicle utilization percentage indicates how efficiently each vehicle type is used.

The calculation is based on the vehicle capacity/riders, all routes, and all vehicle types.

As noted in the chart on the following page, the large buses (72 passenger) utilization rate is 150.5%.

This value highlights the level of expertise of the Transportation Officers and demonstrates

the ongoing efforts to maximize the use of the assets.

The smaller vehicles provide service predominantly to students with special needs.

Given the specialized nature of this type of transportation service it does not allow for efficiency

rates in the ranges of the large buses.

Many of the smaller vehicles transport students who must ride alone or travel greater distances

due to student need, student residence and/or program location.

0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350

HCDSB

HDSB

Metres

290 m

310 m

253

The following graph outlines the capacity ratio by all vehicle types:

* Vehicle utilization is based on assigned riders as of October 31st, 2013.

10


Mini-bus (18 passenger)84.2%

Wheelchair Accessible (3 passenger)64.3%

School purpose mini-van (5 passenger)60.0%

Full-size bus (72 passenger)150.5%

Vehicle Utilization *

254

Financial Statements of

SERVICE DE TRANSPORT DES ÉLÈVES DE HALTON/ HALTON STUDENT TRANSPORTATION SERVICES Year ended August 31, 2014

11


255

KPMG LLP Chartered Accountants Box 976 21 King Street West Suite 700 Hamilton ON L8N 3R1

Telephone (905) 523-8200 Telefax (905) 523-2222 www.kpmg.ca

INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' REPORT

To the Board of Directors of the Service de transport des élèves de Halton/Halton Student Transportation Services

We have audited the accompanying financial statements of Service de transport des élèves de Halton/Halton Student Transportation Services, which comprise the statement of financial position as at August 31, 2014, the statement of operations, change in net debt and cash flows for the year then ended, and notes, comprising a summary of significant accounting policies and other explanatory information.

Management’s Responsibility for the Financial Statements

Management is responsible for the preparation and fair presentation of these financial statements in accordance with Canadian public sector accounting standards, and for such internal control as management determines is necessary to enable the preparation of financial statements that are free from material misstatement, whether due to fraud or error.

Auditors’ Responsibility

Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial statements based on our audit. We conducted our audit in accordance with Canadian generally accepted auditing standards. Those standards require that we comply with ethical requirements and plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free from material misstatement.

An audit involves performing procedures to obtain audit evidence about the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements. The procedures selected depend on our judgment, including the assessment of the risks of material misstatement of the financial statements, whether due to fraud or error. In making those risk assessments, we consider internal control relevant to the entity’s preparation and fair presentation of the financial statements in order to design audit procedures that are appropriate in the circumstances, but not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of the entity’s internal control. An audit also includes evaluating the appropriateness of accounting policies used and the reasonableness of accounting estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall presentation of the financial statements.

We believe that the audit evidence we have obtained is sufficient and appropriate to provide a basis for our audit opinion.

12


256

Opinion

In our opinion, the financial statements present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of Service de transport des élèves de Halton/Halton Student Transportation Services as at August 31, 2014, and its results of operations, its change in net debt and its cash flows for the year then ended in accordance with Canadian public sector accounting standards.

Chartered Professional Accountants, Licensed Public Accountants

Hamilton, Canada October 22, 2014

13


257

SERVICE DE TRANSPORT DES ÉLÈVES DE HALTON/ HALTON STUDENT TRANSPORTATION SERVICES Financial Statements Year ended August 31, 2014

Financial Statements

Statement of Financial Position 1

Statement of Operations 2

Statement of Change in Net Debt 3

Statement of Cash Flows 4

Notes to Financial Statements 5

14


258

SERVICE DE TRANSPORT DES ÉLÈVES DE HALTON/ HALTON STUDENT TRANSPORTATION SERVICES Statement of Financial Position August 31, 2014, with comparative information for 2013 2014 2013

Financial assets Due from related parties (note 4) $ 209,082 $ 428,457

Financial liabilities

Accounts payable and accrued liabilities 8,775 360,630 Due to related parties (note 4) 211,192 73,316 Deferred capital contributions (note 5) 84,660 132,046 304,627 565,992

Net debt (95,545) (137,535)

Non-financial assets Tangible capital assets (note 2) 84,660 132,046 Prepaid expenses 11,645 6,249

96,305 138,295

Accumulated surplus $ 760 $ 760

See accompanying notes to financial statements.

On behalf of the Board of Directors:

Original Signed by:

Lucy Veerman Director

Paul McMahon Director 15


259

SERVICE DE TRANSPORT DES ÉLÈVES DE HALTON/ HALTON STUDENT TRANSPORTATION SERVICES Statement of Operations Year ended August 31, 2014, with comparative information for 2013 2014 2014 2013 Budget Actual Actual Revenues $ 21,070,368 $ 20,541,234 $ 21,556,310 Expenses Transportation services 19,704,554 19,318,631 20,183,698 Administrative expenses

Salaries and benefits 939,144 891,262 906,215 Rent 67,500 62,687 64,653 Professional fees 96,500 67,085 173,754 Communication 49,000 22,533 21,457 Office supplies 35,250 25,015 21,238 Software fees and licenses 95,000 48,485 43,828 Professional development 15,420 7,099 4,444 Travel and meetings 5,500 3,843 3,752 Contractual services 45,000 36,550 71,618 Advertising 7,000 559 577 Equipment 5,000 - 4,385 Insurance 4,500 4,468 3,936 Amortization of tangible capital assets - 52,402 52,152 Day to day maintenance 1,000 615 603

Total expenses 21,070,368 20,541,234 21,556,310 Annual surplus - - - Accumulated surplus, beginning of year - 760 760 Accumulated surplus, end of year $ - $ 760 $ 760


16


260

SERVICE DE TRANSPORT DES ÉLÈVES DE HALTON/ HALTON STUDENT TRANSPORTATION SERVICES Statement of Change in Net Debt

Year ended August 31, 2014, with comparative information for 2013 2014 2013

Annual surplus $ - $ -

Acquisition of tangible capital assets (5,016) - Amortization of tangible capital assets 52,402 52,152 47,386 52,152 Other non-financial asset activity

Acquisition of prepaid expenses (6,794) (6,249) Use of prepaid expenses 1,398 1,341 Total other non-financial asset activity (5,396) (4,908) Change in net debt 41,990 47,244

Net debt, beginning of year (137,535) (184,779)

Net debt, end of year $ (95,545) $ (137,535)


17


261

SERVICE DE TRANSPORT DES ÉLÈVES DE HALTON/ HALTON STUDENT TRANSPORTATION SERVICES Statement of Cash Flows Year ended August 31, 2014, with comparative information for 2013 2014 2013

Cash provided by (used in):

Operating Activities: Annual surplus $ - $ - Item not involving cash:

Amortization of tangible capital assets 52,402 52,152 Revenue recognized from deferred capital

contributions (52,402) (52,152) Changes in non-cash working capital:

(Decrease) increase in accounts payable and accrued liabilities (351,855) 46,894

Increase in prepaid expenses (5,396) (4,908) (357,251) 41,986

Capital Activities: Cash used to acquire tangible capital assets (5,016) - Deferred capital contributions received 5,016 - - -

Investing Activities: Decrease in due from related parties (note 4) 219,375 183,458 Increase (decrease) in due to related parties (note 4) 137,876 (225,444) 357,251 (41,986)

Net change in cash - -

Cash, beginning of year - - Cash, end of year $ - $ -


18


262

HALTON STUDENT TRANSPORTATION SERVICES Notes to Financial Statements Year ended August 31, 2014

Service de transport des élèves de Halton/Halton Student Transportation Services ("HSTS") on behalf of Halton District School Board and the Halton Catholic District School Board (the “School Boards”) was set up to provide transportation services. Prior to September 1, 2013 HSTS also included the Le Conseil scolaire de district catholique du Centre-Sud and Conseil scolaire Viamonde. These school boards withdrew their membership from HSTS effective August 31, 2013.

HSTS was incorporated on February 10, 2009 under the Corporations Act of Ontario as a non-profit corporation without share capital and is exempt from income taxes.

1. Significant accounting policies:

The financial statements are prepared by management in accordance with Canadian public sector accounting standards.

(a) Basis of accounting:

Revenues and expenditures are reported on an accrual basis of accounting. The accrual basis of accounting recognizes revenues as they are earned and measurable; expenses are the cost of goods and services acquired in the period whether or not payment has been made or invoices received.

(b) Tangible capital assets:

Tangible capital assets are recorded at historical cost less accumulated amortization. Historical cost includes amounts that are directly attributable to acquisition, construction, development or betterment of the asset, as well as interest related to financing during construction.

Tangible capital assets, except land, are amortized on a straight line basis over their estimated useful lives as follows:

Asset Estimated useful life in years Computer software 5 Computer hardware 5 Leasehold improvements 5 Furniture and equipment 10

19


263

HALTON STUDENT TRANSPORTATION SERVICES Notes to Financial Statements (continued) Year ended August 31, 2014

1. Significant accounting policies (continued):

(c) Budget figures:

Budget figures have been provided for comparison purposes and have been approved by the Board of Directors of the Service de transport des élèves de Halton/Halton Student Transportation Services. Budget figures were originally approved on May 16, 2013. The revised figures, which are reported in the statement of operations, were approved February 4, 2014. The figures have been reported for the purposes of these statements to comply with PSAB reporting requirements. Budget figures were excluded from the Statement of Change in Net Debt as these amounts were not included in management's revised budgeted figures.

(d) Government transfers:

Government transfers, which include legislative grants, are recognized in the financial statements in the period in which events giving rise to the transfer occur, providing the transfers are authorized, any eligibility criteria have been met and reasonable estimates of the amount can be made.

Government transfers for capital that meet the definition of a liability are referred to as deferred capital contributions (DCC). Amounts are recognized into revenue as the liability is extinguished over the useful life of the asset.

(e) Use of estimates:

The preparation of financial statements requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements, and the reported amounts of revenues and expenses during the period. Significant estimates include assumptions used in estimating accrued liabilities. Amounts recorded for amortization of tangible capital assets are based on estimates of useful service life. Actual results could differ from these estimates.

20


264


2. Tangible capital assets:

Balance at Balance at August 31, August 31, Cost 2013 Additions Disposals 2014 Computer software $ 238,677 $ - $ - $ 238,677 Computer hardware 7,993 - - 7,993 Leasehold improvements 14,088 - - 14,088 Furniture and equipment - 5,016 - 5,016 Total $ 260,758 $ 5,016 $ - $ 265,774

Balance at Balance at August 31, Amortization August 31, Accumulated amortization 2013 Disposals Expense 2014 Computer software $ 122,088 $ - $ 47,735 $ 169,823 Computer hardware 2,398 - 1,599 3,997 Leasehold improvements 4,226 - 2,818 7,044 Furniture and equipment - - 250 250 Total $ 128,712 $ - $ 52,402 $ 181,114

August 31, August 31, Net book value 2013 2014 Computer software $ 116,589 $ 68,854 Computer hardware 5,595 3,996 Leasehold improvements 9,862 7,044 Furniture and equipment - 4,766 Total $ 132,046 $ 84,660

3. Economic dependence:

Effective September 1, 2013, HSTS’s operations will consist exclusively of supplying services to Halton District School Board and Halton Catholic District School Board. HSTS will be economically dependent on these boards for its busing revenues.

21


265


4. Due from/to related party:

Amounts included in due from related parties are due to the following partners of HSTS: 2014 2013

Halton District School Board $ 209,082 $ 428,457 $ 209,082 $ 428,457

Amounts included in due to related parties are due to the following partners of HSTS: 2014 2013

Halton Catholic District School Board $ 211,192 $ 55,228 Le Conseil scolaire de district catholique du Centre-Sud - 9,776 Conseil scolaire Viamonde - 8,312

$ 211,192 $ 73,316

Amounts due from/to related parties are non-interest bearing and will be repaid within the period.

5. Deferred capital contributions:

Government transfers for capital that meet the definition of a liability are referred to as deferred capital contributions. Amounts are recognized into revenue as the liability is extinguished over the useful life of the asset.

2014 2013

Balance, beginning of year $ 132,046 $ 184,198 Additions to deferred capital contributions 5,016 - Revenue recognized in the period (52,402) (52,152)

Balance, end of year $ 84,660 $ 132,046

22


266


6. Lease commitments:

The HSTS leases office premises with terms to October 31, 2017. The minimum annual rental under this agreement is as follows:

Fiscal year ending August 31 2015 $ 64,653 2016 64,653 2017 64,653 2018 10,776 $ 204,735

23


267

WALK WITH JESUS - MAY 7, 2015 Page 1 of 2



WALK WITH JESUS – THURSDAY, MAY 7, 2015

PURPOSE:

To provide trustees with information about the sixth annual “Walk With Jesus” event that will be held on Thursday, May 7, 2015 during Catholic Education Week.

REMARKS:

The annual Walk with Jesus is an opportunity for students to demonstrate Catholic Witness as they walk for social justice. This annual event takes place during Catholic Education week. This event not only raises funds for the Halton Catholic Children’s Education Foundation, but as well is a visible demonstration in the community of our Witness to Jesus.

Student representatives from each elementary and secondary school are invited to participate in the walk and the remaining student populations are invited to participate in a local walk at some time throughout Catholic Education Week. School communities are encouraged to engage in the walk on that day through the use of social media. Schools are encouraged to use #HCWWJ on Twitter or can view the live feed via TweetBeam using the following link http://www.tweetbeam.com/show?id=K30fc”. The walk will begin at Bronte Creek Provincial Park with an Opening Liturgy at 10:30 a.m. Participants will then walk to Corpus Christi Catholic Secondary School, where the walk will conclude with Mass celebrated by Bishop Crosby at 12:30 p.m. in the school gymnasium. A live feed of the mass will also be available for home school viewing.

Twenty student representatives from each of our 54 schools will participate in the “Walk With Jesus” event. The selection of the 20 students will be at the discretion of each school. Criteria for selection may be based on the guidelines for the “Student Awards of Excellence”; however, this is a unique opportunity to engage students who may be struggling with their faith development, or students who have not experienced leadership opportunities in the past. A combination of the above may be optimal as we wish to reach and engage the widest range of the student population. A letter template for students to apply to participate in the Walk With Jesus has been made available for Principals and Vice Principals. Elementary schools have been asked to select students from grades 6 through 8. Secondary schools have been asked to send representatives from all grades.

All proceeds from this day will support our Social Justice commitments with donations/pledges being given to the Halton Catholic Children’s Education Foundation.

Additional fundraising opportunities are encouraged at the local level, and may include: local walk-a-thons, Spirit days, movie nights, raffles and penny drives.

268

http://www.tweetbeam.com/show?id=K30fc

WALK WITH JESUS - MAY 7, 2015 Page 2 of 2

CONCLUSION:

The Walk With Jesus will provide a unique opportunity for students to demonstrate Catholic witness as they walk for social justice.

There will be no cost to individual schools to participate in the walk.

REPORT PREPARED LORRIE NAAR & SUBMITTED BY: SUPERINTENDENT OF EDUCATION

REPORT APPROVED BY: P. DAWSON DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION AND SECRETARY OF THE BOARD

269

Oakville Secondary Schools Boundary Review Page 1 of 2



OAKVILLE SECONDARY SCHOOLS BOUNDARY REVIEW

UPDATE PURPOSE:

To update the Board on the Oakville Secondary Schools Boundary Review process and identify upcoming milestones.

BACKGROUND INFORMATION:

1. Action Report 8.2, “Oakville Secondary Schools Boundary Review”, from the February 17, 2015 Regular Board Meeting.

COMMENTS:

The Oakville Secondary Schools Boundary Review seeks to address growing enrolment pressures at St. Thomas Aquinas Catholic Secondary School.

At the February 17, 2015 Regular Meeting of the Board, Trustees approved Board Resolution #28/15,

RESOLVED, that the Halton Catholic District School Board conduct a School Boundary Review Process for the Oakville secondary school panel to address growing accommodation pressures and program needs, to be implemented for the 2016-2017 school year.

Following the approval of the Board, Planning Services completed its analysis of the existing Town of Oakville secondary schools’ attendance boundaries and reviewed potential options that would address growing enrolment pressures. Of the options reviewed, Planning Services and senior staff shortlisted (4) options that were to be presented to the School Boundary Review Advisory Committee.

Senior staff invited one parent council representative and one alternate from each elementary and secondary school in Oakville to form the Oakville Secondary Schools Advisory Committee. Membership was confirmed on March 4, 2015 (see Appendix A for membership).

On March 4, 2015, senior staff and Planning Services met with the Advisory Committee at St. Mary’s Catholic Elementary School and presented four (4) options. Overall the committee was satisfied with the four (4) options presented.

270

Oakville Secondary Schools Boundary Review Page 2 of 2

All supporting material is now posted on the Board’s public website for the April 13, 2015 Community Consultation Meeting. These materials are presented in the following appendices:

1. Appendix B for the presentation and associated options; 2. Appendix C for the Meeting Minutes; and, 3. Appendix D for the compilation of Advisory Committee questions to Senior Staff. 4. Appendix E for the Advisory Committee Interim Report

PROJECT MILESTONES:

Below is a summary of completed and upcoming tasks for the completion of the Oakville Secondary School Boundary Review. Completed Tasks: Board approves Oakville Secondary Schools Boundary Review Process February 17, 2015 Inaugural Advisory Committee Meeting March 4, 2015 Advisory Committee Meeting Interim Report Posted on Board Website April 2, 2015 Upcoming Steps: Community Consultation Meeting at Loyola April 13, 2015 Community Comments & Feedback are due May 8, 2015 Advisory Committee reviews Options & Community Input May 14, 2015 Advisory Committee Final Report posted on website May 28, 2015 Advisory Committee Final Report & Recommendations presented to Board June 2, 2015 Board receives Delegations & approves new secondary school boundaries June 16, 2015 CONCLUSION:

The Oakville Secondary Schools Boundary Review is progressing as scheduled. It is anticipated that the final recommendation will be brought forward to the Board in June for review and approval in time for the 2015-2016 secondary registration timelines. REPORT PREPARED & TONI PINELLI SUBMITTED BY: SUPERINTENDENT OF EDUCATION, SCHOOL SERVICES

CAMILLO CIPRIANO SUPERINTENDENT OF EDUCATION, SCHOOL SERVICES

GIACOMO CORBACIO SUPERINTENDENT OF FACILITIES SERVICES, FACILITY SERVICES FREDERICK THIBEAULT ADMINISTRATOR OF PLANNING SERVICES, BUSINESS SERVICES REPORT APPROVED BY: P. DAWSON DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION AND SECRETARY OF THE BOARD

271

Appendix A

OAKVILLE SECONDARY SCHOOLS SCHOOL BOUNDARY REVIEW COMMITTEE

2014-2015

NAME SCHOOL HOLY TRINITY FAMILY OF SCHOOLS Erin Bell Holy Trinity CSS, Parent Representative Peter Longo Our Lady of Peace CES, Parent Representative Susan English St. Andrew CES, Parent Representative Janice Naylor St. John CES, Parent Representative Lyn Hartman St. Marguerite d’Youville CES, Parent Representative Robert Griesbach St. Michael CES, Parent Representative ST. IGNATIUS OF LOYOLA FAMILY OF SCHOOLS Diane Bello St. Ignatius of Loyola CSS, Parent Representative Lisa Ryce Mother Teresa CES, Parent Representative Karen Church Mother Teresa CES, ALT Parent Representative Leanne Holland Bernadette CES, Parent Representative Heidi Flood St. Joan of Arc CES, Parent Representative Jeff Mamer St. John Paul II CES, Parent Representative Jason Tadros St. Matthew CES ST. THOMAS AQUINAS FAMILY OF SCHOOLS Michelle Cole-Henderson St. Thomas Aquinas CSS, Parent Representative Kendra Paiement Holy Family CES, Parent Representative Carolyn Suter St. Dominic CES, Parent Representative Krista Leaver St. James CES, Parent Representative Dallas Nicholson St. Joseph CES, Parent Representative Loretta Perdue St. Luke, Parent Representative Jasna Grbavac St. Mary, Parent Representative Robert Berlettano St. Mary CES, ALT Parent Representative Fiorella Zarlenga St. Mary, ALT Parent Representative Ryan Pimenta St. Vincent, Parent Representative HALTON CATHOLIC DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD STAFF Toni Pinelli Superintendent of Education, St. Thomas Aquinas Family of Schools Camillo Cipriano Superintendent of Education, St. Ignatius of Loyola Family of Schools Giacomo Corbacio Superintendent, Facility Management Services Frederick Thibeault Administrator, Planning Services

272

Oakville2014-2015Secondary Boundary Review

Wednesday, March 4, 2015St. Mary Catholic Elementary School

Appendix B

273

Agenda• OpeningPrayer&Introductions

• CommitteeComposition

• I-29Policy&ProcessOverview

• BoundaryReviewCriteria

• MilestoneDates&MeetingSchedule

• CurrentSchoolBoundaries

• SchoolBoundaryOptions

• NextSteps&Questions

Page 1274

WHY A BOUNDARY REVIEW?

Page 2275

Why A Boundary Review?

• DecliningenrolmentatHolyTrinityCatholicSecondarySchool(HLYT)andSt.IgnatiusofLoyolaCatholicSecondarySchool(LYLA)

• NorthOakville(NorthofDundas)developmenthasstartedtoyieldstudents

• St.ThomasAquinasCatholicSecondarySchool(AQUI)cannotaccommodateanyportablesonsite,andisnearingitsbuiltcapacity

• AQUI’sgrowingIBprogramwillfurtheraccelerategrowthpressures

• Potentialtore-distributehighenrolmentgrowthacrossOakvilleSecondarySchools,andreduceunderutilizedclassroomspace

Page 3276

Schools Involved

St. Ignatius of Loyola Catholic Secondary School

Holy Trinity Catholic Secondary School

St. Thomas of Aquinas Catholic Secondary School

Page 4277

SCHOOL BOUNDARYREVIEW COMMITTEE (SBRC)

Page 5278

School Boundary Review Committee (SBRC)

• Oneparentrepresentativefromeachelementaryandsecondary

schoolcommunity(20)

• BoardStaff

• TheCommitteerepresentstheinterestsofallinvolvedparties-

thestudents,thefamiliesandthestaff

• TheCommitteeisanAdvisoryCommitteeonly

Page 6279

POLICY OVERVIEW

Page 7280

Committee Mandate

• ToreviewandevaluateschoolboundaryoptionsfortheOakville

Catholicsecondaryschools

• ToassessboundaryoptionsbasedontheHaltonCatholicDistrict

SchoolBoardcriteriainBoardPolicyI-29,SchoolBoundaryReview

Process

Page 8281

Committee Mandate

• Tofacilitatecommunicationandunderstandingoftheschoolboundary

reviewprocesstotheschoolcommunitiesinOakville

• Toreviewcommunityinputandsubmitafinalrecommendationtothe

Board

Page 9282

BOUNDARY REVIEWCRITERIA

Page 10283

Boundary Review Criteria

• Optimizeschoolswithinenrolmentcapacities

• Minimizeuseofportableclassrooms

• Minimizefutureboundaryadjustments

• Optimizecost-effectiveschooltransportation

• Optimizeschoolenrolmenttoensurecost-effectiveprogramdelivery

• ConsiderationofCatholicParishboundariestoextentpossible

Page 11284

SCHEDULE

Page 12285

Proposed Milestone DatesMILESTONES DATES

1. BoardapprovesOakvilleSecondarySchools February 17, 2015BoundaryReviewProcess

2. InauguralSBRCMeeting March 4, 2015

3. SecondSBRCMeeting(Possible) March 25, 2015

4. SBRCInterimReportPostedonBoardWebsite 1 week after final meeting

5. CommunityConsultationMeeting April 13, 2015

6. CommunityComments&Feedbackaredue May 8, 2015

7. SBRCreviewsOptions&CommunityInput May 14, 2015

8. SBRCFinalReportpostedonwebsite May 28, 2015

9. SBRCFinalReport&RecommendationspresentedtotheBoard June 2, 2015

10. BoardreceivesDelegationsandapprovesnew June 16, 2015secondaryschoolboundaries

Page 13286

BOUNDARY OPTIONS

Page 14287

Legend

N

SER V

ICE

RD

SOLIN

GATE

DR

BURL

OAK

DR

HARVESTER RD

TRAFALGAR

RD

TRAF

ALGA

R RD

B RO

NT E

RD

MAINWAY

RAND O LPHC

RES

APPL

EBY

LIN

E

REGI

ON

AL R

D 25

KERR

ST

CHAR

TWEL

L RD

DES JARDINES DR

ELMWO OD RD

SPRUCE AVE

SIXTEEN MILE DR

KAITING TR

NEW ST

W ST

GATW

ICK DR

PINEHURST

DRM

APLE

GRO

VE D

R

REBECCA ST

CORNWALL RD

N PK BLVD

LAKESHORE RD

SIXT

H L

INE

WIN

STO

N C

HURC

HIL

L BL

VD

WEM BLEY

RD

GLA

DES IDE

AVE

SOVEREIGN ST

RIVER GLEN BLVD

MO

RRIS

ON

RD

CRAIGL EITH RD

EL MRD

MERIC O URT RD

FAIRVIEW ST

LAKESHORE RD E

ROBE

RT B

ROW

N BL

VD

DRYDEN AVE

GARLAN D

C R ES

VICTORIA ST

MIKALDARD

N RIDGE TR

GROSV EN

OR

ST

REBECCA ST

LONGMOOR

DR

DUNDAS ST E

STEVENSONRD

FORS

YTH

EST

DAVIS RD

REYN

OLD

S ST

JENN

AVE

RIDGE DR

TAUN

TON

RD

HOP KINS

DR

WIL

LIS

DR

GOO

DRA

MD

R

OA

KHAV

END

R

MA PLE AVE

KINGSW

AYDR

GLENASHTON DR

BA RTO

S DR

OXF

ORD

AVE

KESTELL

BLVD

ONTARIO ST

WAL

BY D

R

BARO

NW

OO

DDR

SENECA DR

FOTH

ERG

ILL

BLVD

POPL

ARDRW

ATSO

N A

VE

BRIDGE RD

GLEN VALLEY RD

RIVER OAKS BLVDW

PARK GLEN

AV E

WARREN DR

WYA

NDOTTE DR

TENN

YSO

NDR

BO ND ST

HAYS BLVDPINE GLEN RD

STEE

PL

ECHASE DR

CONSTANCE DR

MCCRANEYST

E

BURNET ST

BLOO

MFI

ELD

DR

BELYEA ST

G ULL ED GE

TR

T HOMAS ALTON BLVD

MARINE DR

DIGBY

RD

BRIDLE

W O O D

TR

LAKESHORE RD W

WILLIAM ST

BEVA

N DR

GR ANBY

DR

ARRO WHEAD RD

SANDPIPER RD

H AW T H OR NE D R

LAMPM

AN

AV E

O LD ABB EYLA

NE

ARBOUR V IEW DR

KING ST

RIVER OAKS BLVD E

YOLANDADR

RO SEWOODLAN

E

HOLTON

HTS DR

CA PEAVE

SPRUCE ST

JULI

A AV

E

GA MBLE

RD

C H E V ERIE ST

CULHAM ST

RIDGE

LNDG

LEIGHLAND AVE

IN GL EDE

NE

DR

SHER

WO

OD

HTS DR

BURG

UND

Y DR

MISSISSAG

A ST

BENNETT RDAN

DOV

ER R

D

DEANE AVE

MO

RDEN

RD

COSBURNCRES

THIR

DLI

NE

BUR TO

NRD

SHO

REAC

RES

RD

DUNEDIN RD

ERIN DALE

DR

A INTR EE

TERR

GRACE DR

TUCK

DR

SEAFARE DR

BENNING TON G T

VALLEYDR

HIXON ST

BERW

ICK

DR

OAK WALK DR

TANSLEY DR

DEER RU N A VE

GIBS

ON D

R

A LBIONAVE

WED

GEW

OO

D D

R

S ARAZEN DR

BIS HOPSG T

TAYWOOD DR

GLEN

OAK

DR

LAKEVIE W

DR

S TA

NFI

ELD

DR

MAP

LEH

URST

AVE

SABE

LST

REEVES RD

WES

TMI N

STER

DR

ROBINSON ST

SUMNER AVEPALMER AVE

NEYA

GAW

A BL

VDW

OO

DALE

AVE

RANDALL ST

STRATU

SD

R

JOHN ST

CLEAVER DR

ASHB

URY

RD

LINBROOK RD

POSTRI DGE

DR

FRONT ST

QUEEN ELIZABETH WAY QUEEN ELIZABETH WAY

CHURCH ST

DOU

GLA

S AV

E

ROYAL WINDSOR DR

COLE CRES

SSERVICE RD W

SECO

ND S

T

EIG H

THL I

NE

UPPER MIDDLE RD UPPER MIDDLE RD W

PINEDALE AVE

MILLER RD

FIRST

ST

IROQUOIS SHORE RD

DUNDAS ST W

POST

RD

REEVESG T

N SER V ICE

RD

W

KHAL

SA G

T

STANBU RY RD

SPEERS RD

AR

GUS RD

ERWIN RD

NO 1 SIDE RD

G REENWO

OD

C RE

S

WESTMOUNT DR

CA R

EY

RD

ROS EM OUN

TCRES

BOROSRD

S A LCOM

E

D R

WATERBRI

DG EDR

POPL

AR D

R

P LYMOUTH DR

DON

E SS L

ED R

IRON

ST

ONE DR

CAUL DERDR

PINE AVE

UPPER MIDDLE RD E

GATEW

AY

MO

NT C

L AIR

DR

WYECROFT RD

JOSH

UASCREE

KDR

INTE

RNA T

I ON A

LB L

V D

KEN

T AV

E

WIL

SON

AVE

BUCK

INGH

AM R

D

HEN

DERS

ON

RD

VERDIST

S SERVICE RD

ELTO

NPK

RD

BURNHAMTHORPE RD W

DUNDAS ST

OA K

C

RES

PACI

FIC

RD

SAVOYCRES

TREM

AIN

E RD

CO VE NT RY RD

PROG

R ESS

CT

GLEN ABBE Y GT

BERYL RD

HWY 407

HWY 407

INDUST RY

ST

JEZERO

CRES

ADAIR

C R E S

BALS

AM

DR

BRIGHTON RD

PORTLAND DR

I NV

I C

TA DR

HOSP

ITAL G

T

MELVIN AVE

REDW

OOD

SQ

VENE

T IA D R

COLO

N IA L

CRES

NIN

TH L

INE

HARRIS ON

CT

HW

Y40

3

MCP HERSO

NRD

C ASTL EF

I

ELDCRES

PALETTAC

T

P A L LA

DIUM WAY

SUPERIOR CT

NO 2 SIDE RD

FOURTH LINE

BELL

SCH

OO

L LI

NE

NSH

ER

IDAN WAY

IT ABASH I WAY

BURNHAMTHORPE RD E

WAL

KER'

SLI

NE

PATH

FIN

DE

R DR

DORVAL DR

BRAYS

LANE

TRAILSIDE

DR

E ST

QU

EEN

MAR

Y DR

TAY

L OR CRE S

RIVE

RVIEWST

SUTT

ON

DR

NAUTICAL BLVD

VALLE YR IDGE

DR

MO

HAWK

R D

NAVY

ST

CROSS AVE

NOTT

ING

HIL

LG

T

W YNTENW

AY

DE VON RD

ALLA

N S

T

WIN

T ERB

OUR NEDR

FORD

DR

LEES

LAN

E

SUN

SET

DR

HEN

DER

SON

RD

WHITEO

AKSBLVD

BLUE SPRUCE AVE

DEER

HURS

TDR

CREE

KPA

TH

AVE

CORP

ORA

TE D

R

GRAND BLVD

POSTMASTER

DR

MILLCROFT PK DR

GRAND RAVINE DR

HERITAGEW

AY

SAN

DLE

WO

OD

RDRIVE RSID

ED

R

GRA

NDO

AKT R

GEORG IAN DRFALLIN G GRE

END

R

MEADOWHILL

RD

TOWNE BLVD

RIV E

RBANK W AY

FOU

RTH

LIN

E

CHIS

HOLM

ST

K W

INTE

RRD

NIC

HOLS

DR

MA

DDE N

BLVD

TURNB ERRY

RD

FALGARWOOD DR

BAYSHIR E

DR

PILGRIM

S WAY

SALE

M R

D

STRATT O

N

RD

DUNV EGAN AV E

PINEGROVE RD

SE ATON

DR

STATIO

NM

ASTER

LAN E

ELIZ

A CR

ESB RID

L E

WOOD

DUNCAN RD

CL

UBVIEW DR

WIC

K LO W

R D

SAND

WEL

L D

R

GA

BLE DR

WO

O DH A

V EN

PKDR

PROU

DFO

OT

TR

C AR OL

RD

WINSTON

RD

OA

K PK BLVD

TRAC

INA

DR

TRUM

AN A

VE

HIDD ENTR

BRISTOL CIRC

CRE EKSIDE

DR

CRE S

T MON

TDR

THEL

MA

ST

BING

LEY

CR ES

ARM

OUR CRES

LINDS

AYD

R

HILL

ST

JOHN LUCAS DR

FIELDCREST LANE

PHOE

BE C

RES

S SERVICE RD E

PEN ST

CLEA

R VIE

WDR

OLD

BRO

NTE

RD

RAYNE AVE

N SERVICE R D E

ZEN

ON

DR

S SHERIDAN WAY

HERI

TAGE RD

THE CANADIAN RD

LYNDHURS

TDR

APPL

EBY

L IN

E

QUEEN ELIZABETH WAY

HIG

HW

AY 403

HIGHWAY 407

CORP LYLA

AQUI

ASCN

PATR

SHOJ

ANNE

CHRS

ELIZ

OLPO

ANDR

JOHO

MARG

MICH

MOTH

POPE

BERN

JOAN

MATT

HLYF

DOMI

STJAJOSO

LUKE

VINC

MARY

V31

P35

L3

K3L9 L7

M9

K8

K9

N9

L6

M4

M1

L4

L16

L18

L19 M20

K24

M21K21

K20

I37

W23

O8

O9

P3

P6 Q4

R7

R10 S15

S17

S8

U14

V14

W11

W14

X14Y20

Y13

T18

U17

W24

W25

V19

U19

U21U20

U22U23

U25

T20

T25

T24P26P25

S21

S18

S19

S20

P10

P19

P20

P21

P27

P22

V23

I38 V24P30

K16

O20

O21

O18

M22

P23

T21

W22

V17Y21

K26

U24

N1 O7

Q10

U16T14

P28

W21

V20

P24

W26W20

¯

Tow

n of

Oak

ville

2016-2017 Oakville Secondary School Boundary ReviewThe current street network was provided by the Regional Municipality of Halton and the Region assumes no responsibil ity or liability for its use or accuracy. Proposed roads are subject to change. It is the intention of the HCDSB to provideup-to-date and accurate information, and reasonable efforts have been made by the HCDSB to verify the information, however a degree of error or change is inherent. This information is distributed “as is” without warranty. HCDSB assumesno legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information. If you require additional information please contact the Planning Services Department at 905-632-6314 or visit www.haltonbus.ca for additional school boundary information.

CURRENT BOUNDARIES

0 1 2 3 4KMs

Other BoundariesSt. Thomas Aquinas CSSHoly Trinity CSSSt. Ignatius of Loyola

City

of B

urlin

gton

Town of Milton

Town of Oakville

City

of M

issi

ssau

ga

Tow

n of

Oak

ville

Boundaries Re-direct Study Area

2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029CBOUND 106 124 137 140 158 157 151 161 151 153 149 154 156 154 149 146Ext FI 59 78 89 93 98 99 105 98 100 110 122 123 121 117 114 111RT - ROND 0 32 62 79 95 101 131 165 191 217 242 269 293 304 328 351RT - EC 1017 998 991 1015 994 969 967 937 926 926 929 923 922 915 894 876TOTAL (IN+OUT - BOUND) 1182 1233 1278 1327 1345 1327 1354 1360 1368 1406 1441 1468 1492 1490 1485 1483FBC 1382 1382 1382 1382 1382 1382 1382 1382 1382 1382 1382 1382 1382 1382 1382 1382FBC + MAX PORTABLES 1658 1658 1658 1658 1658 1658 1658 1658 1658 1658 1658 1658 1658 1658 1658 1658

1182 1233 1278

1327 1345 1327 1354 1360 1368 1406 1441 1468 1492 1490 1485 1483

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

1800

ENR

OLM

ENT

(HC

)

St. Ignatius of Loyola CSS - Enrolment Trend Option #1A


1240 1251 1223 1183 1174 1153 1132 1124 1149 1156 1237

1311 1353 1392 1406 1419

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

1800

ENR

OLM

ENT

(HC

)

Holy Trinity CSS - Enrolment Trend Option #1A

Student Enrolment Breakdown

Cross-BoundaryExtended French ImmersionNew DevelopmentExisting Communities

Portable Capacity + FBCPortable Capacity + FBCFunctional Building Capacity

Total Enrolment Head Count (HC)

Page 15288

CURRENT BOUNDARIES

Page 16289

Current Boundaries

N

SER V

ICE

RD

SOLIN

GATE

DR

HAM

P TO

NH

EATH

RD

BURL

OAK

DR

HARVESTER RD

TRAFAL GAR

RD

TRAF

ALGA

R RD

B RO

NT E

RD

MAINWAY

RAND O LPHC

RES

APPL

EBY

LIN

E

REG

I ON A

LRD

25

KERR

ST

CHAR

TWEL

L RD

DES JARDINES DR

ELMWO OD RD

SPRUCE AVE

SIXTEEN MILE DR

KAITING TR

NEW ST

W ST

GATWICK DR

PINEHURST

DRM

APLE

GRO

VE D

R

REBECCA ST

CORNWALL RD

N PK BLVD

LAKESHORE RD

SIXT

HL I

NE

WIN

STO

N C

HURC

HIL

L BL

VD

WEM BLEY

RD

GLA

DESIDEAVE

SOVEREIGN ST

RIVER GLEN BLVD CRAIGL EITH RD

ELM

R D

FAIRVIEW ST

LAKESHORE RD E

ROBE

RT B

ROW

N BL

VD

GARLAN D

C R ES

VICTORIA ST

MIKALDARD

N RIDGE TR

REBECCA ST

SH ERIDAN GRD NDR

LONGMOOR

DR

DUNDAS ST E

STEVENSONRD

FORS

YTH

EST

DAVIS RD

REYN

OLD

S ST

JENN

AVE

RIDGE DR

TAUN

TON

RD

HOP KINS

DR

WIL

LIS

DR

GOO

DRA

MD

R

OA

KHAV

END

R

MA PLE AVE

KINGSW

AYDR

GLENA SHTON DR

BA RTO

S DR

OXF

ORD

AVE

KESTELL

BLVD

ONTARIO ST

WAL

BY D

R

BROMLEY RD

BARO

NW

OOD

DR

SENECA DR

FOTH

ERG

ILL

BLVD

POPL

ARDR

WAT

SON

AVE

BRIDGE RD

GLEN VALLEY RD

PARK GLEN

AV E

WARREN DR

WYA

NDOTTE DR

TENN

YSO

NDR

BO ND ST


STEE

PL

ECHASE DR

CONSTANCE DR

MCCRANEYST

E

BURNET ST

BLOO

MFI

ELD

DR

BELYEA ST

G ULL ED GE

TR

T HOMAS ALTON BLVD

MARINE DR

DIGBY

RD

BRIDLE

W O O D

TR

LAKESHORE RD W

WILLIAM ST

BEVA

N DR

GR ANBY

DR

ARRO WHEAD RD

SANDPIPER RD

H AW T H OR NE D R

LAMPM

AN

AV E

O LD ABB EYLA

NE

ARBOUR V IEW DR

KING ST

RIVER OAKS BLVD E

YOLANDADR

HOLTON

HTS DR

CA PEAVE

SPRUCE ST

JULI

A AV

E

GA MBLE

RD

C H E V ERIE ST

CULHAM ST

RIDGE

LNDG

LEIGHLAND AVE

IN GL EDE

NE

DR

WINSTON RD

SHER

WO

OD

HTS DR

BURG

UND

Y DR

MISSISSAG

A ST

BENNETT RD

ANDO

VER

RD

DEANE AVE

MO

RDEN

RD

COSBURNCRES

THIR

D L

INE

BUR TO

NRD

SHO

REAC

RES

RD

DUNEDIN RD

GRACE DR

TUCK

DR

SEAFARE DR

BENNING TON GT

VALLEYDR

HIXON ST

BERW

ICK

DR

OAK WALK DR

TANSLEY DR

DEER RU N A VE

GIBS

ON D

R

A LBIONAVE

WED

GEW

OO

D D

R

S ARAZEN DR

BIS HOPSG T

TAYWOOD DR

GLEN

OAK

DR

LAKEVIE W

DR

S TAN

FIE L

DDR

MAP

LEH

URST

AVE

SABE

LST

REEVES RD

WES

TMI N

STER

DR

ROBINSON ST


NEYA

GAW

A BL

VDW

OO

DALE

AVE

RANDALL ST

STRATU

SD R

JOHN ST

CLEAVER DR

ASHB

URY

RD

LINBROOK RD

POSTRI DGE

DR

FRONT ST


CHURCH ST

DOU

GLA

S AV

EROYAL WINDSOR DR

COLE CRES

SSERVICE RD W

SECO

ND S

T

EIG

HTH

LIN

E


PINEDALE AVE

MILLER RD

FIRST

ST

IROQUOIS SHORE RD

DUNDAS ST WDUNDAS ST W

POST

RD

REEVESG T

N SERVICE RD W

KHAL

SA G

T

STANBU RY RD

SPEERS RD

AR

GUS RD

ERWIN RD

NO 1 SIDE RD

G REENWO

OD

C RE

S

WESTMOUNT DR

CA R

EY

RD

ROS EM OUN

TCRES

BOROSRD

S A LCOM

E

D R

WATERBRI

DG EDR

POPL

AR D

R

PL YMOUTH DR

DON

E SS L

ED R

IRON

ST

ONE DR

CAUL DERDR

PINE AVE

UPPER MIDDLE RD E

GATEW

AY

MO

NT C

L AIR

DR

WYECROFT RD

JOSH

UASCREE K

DR

INTE

RNA T

I ON A

LB L

V D

KEN

T AV

E

WIL

SON

AVE

BUCK

INGH

AM R

D

HEN

DERS

ON

RD

VERDIST

ELTO

NPK

RD

BURNHAMTHORPE RD W

DUNDAS ST

OA K

C

RESPA

CIFI

C RD

SAVOYCRES

TREM

AIN

E RD

CO VE NT RY RD

PROG

R ESS

CT

GLEN ABBE Y GT

BERYL RD

HWY 407

HWY 407

INDUST RY

ST

JEZERO

CRES

ADAIR

C R E S

BALS

AM

DR

C AST

LE

CRES

BRIGHTON RD

PORTLAND DR

I NV

I C

TA DR

HOSP

ITAL G

T

CEN

TURY

DR

MELVIN AVE

SYSCON

R D

REDW

OOD

SQ

VENE

T IA D R

COLO

N IA L

CRES

NIN

TH L

INE

HARRIS ON

CT

HWY

403

MCP HERSO

NRD

C ASTL EF

I

ELDCRES

PALETTACT

PALLADIUM WAY

SUPERIOR CT

NO 2 SIDE RD

FOURTH LINE

BELL

SCH

OO

L LI

NE

NSH

ER

IDAN WAY

IT ABASH I WAY

BURNHAMTHORPE RD E

WAL

KER'

SLI

NE

PATH

F IND

ER DR

DORVALDR

BRAYS

LANE

TRAILSIDE

DR

E ST

QU

EEN

MAR

Y DR

TAY

L OR CRE S

RIVE

RVIEWST

SUTTO

ND

R

NAUTICAL BLVD

VALLE YR IDG

ED

R

MO

HAWK

R D

NAVY

ST

CROSS AVE

NOTT

ING

HIL

LG

T

W YNTENW

AY

DEVON RD

ALLA

N S

T

WIN

T ERB

OUR NEDR

FORD

DR

LEES

LAN

E

SUN

SET

DR

HEN

DER

SON

RD

WHITEO

AKSBLVD

B LUE SPRUCE AVE

DEER

HURS

TDR

CREE

KPA

TH

AVE

CORP

ORA

TE D

R

GRAND

BLVD

POSTMASTER

DR

MILLCROFT PK DR

GRAND RAVINE DR

HERITAGEW

AY

SAN

DLE

WO

OD

RDRIVE RSID

ED

R

GRAN

DO

AKTR

FALLIN G GRE

END

R

MEADOWHILL

RD

TOWNE BLVD

RIV E

RBANK W AY

FOU

RTH

LIN

E

CHIS

HOLM

ST

K W

INTE

RRD

NIC

HOLS

DR

MA

DDE N

BLVD

TURNB ERRY

RD

FALGARWOOD DR

BAYSHIR E

DR

PILGRIM

S WAY

SALE

M R

D

DUNV EGAN AV E

PINEGROVE RD

SE ATON

DR

STATIO

NM

ASTER

LAN E

ELIZ

A CR

ESB RID

L E

WOOD

DUNCAN RD

CL

UBVIEW DR

WIC

K LO W

R D

SAND

WEL

L D

R

GA

BLE DR

WO

O DH A

V EN

PKDR

PROUDFOO

TTR

C AR OL

RD

WINSTON

RD

TRAC

INA

DR

TRUM

AN A

VE

HIDD ENTR

BRISTOL CIRC

CRE EKSIDEDR

C RE S

T MON

TDR

THEL

MA

ST

BING

LEY

CR ES

ARM

OUR CRES

LINDS

AYD

R

HILL

ST

JOHN LUCAS DR

FIELDCREST LANE

PHOE

BE C

RES

S SERVICE RD E

PEN ST

CLEA

R VIE

WDR

OLD

BRO

NTE

RD

S SERVICE RD

RAYNE AVE

N SERVICE RD E

ZEN

ON

DR

S SHERIDAN WAY

HERI

TAGE RD

THE CANADIAN RD

APPL

EBY

L IN

E

QUEEN ELIZ

ABETH W

AY

HIG

HW

AY 403

HIGHWAY 407

ASCN

PATR

SHOJ

ANNE

CHRS

ELIZ

OLPO ANDR

JOHO

MARG

MICH

MOTH

POPE

BERN

JOAN

MATT

HLYF

DOMI

STJAJOSO

LUKE

VINC

MARY

V31

P35

L3

K3L9

L7

M9

K8

K9N9

L6

M4

M1

L4

L16

L18

L19 M20

K24

M21

K21

K20

I37

W23

O8

O9

P3

P6 Q4

R7

R10 S15

S17

S8

U14

V14

W11

W14

X14

Y20

Y13

T18

U17

W24

W25

V19

U19

U21U20

U22

U25T20

T25

T24P26P25

S21

S18

S19

S20

P10

P19

P20

P21

P27

P22

V23I38

V24

P30

K16

O20

O21

O18

M22

P23

T21

W22

V17Y21

K26

U24

N1 O7

Q10

U16T14

P28

W21

V20

P24

W26

W20

CORP

HLYT

LYLA

AQUI

¯

Tow

n of

Oak

ville


CURRENT BOUNDARIES

0 1 2 3 4KMs


City

of B

urlin

gton

Town of Milton

Town of Oakville

City

of M

issi

ssau

ga

Tow

n of

Oak

ville

N

SER V

ICE

RD

SOLIN

GATE

DR

BURL

OAK

DR

HARVESTER RD

TRAFALGAR

RD

TRAF

ALGA

R RD

B RO

NT E

RD

MAINWAY

RAND O LPHC

RES

APPL

EBY

LIN

E

REGI

ON

AL R

D 25

KERR

ST

CHAR

TWEL

L RD

DES JARDINES DR

ELMWO OD RD

SPRUCE AVE

SIXTEEN MILE DR

KAITING TR

NEW ST

W ST

GATW

ICK DR

PINEHURST

DRM

APLE

GRO

VE D

R

REBECCA ST

CORNWALL RD

N PK BLVD

LAKESHORE RD

SIXT

H L

INE

WIN

STO

N C

HURC

HIL

L BL

VD

WEM BLEY

RD

GLA

DES IDE

AVE

SOVEREIGN ST

RIVER GLEN BLVD

MO

RRIS

ON

RD

CRAIGL EITH RD

EL MRD

MERIC O URT RD

FAIRVIEW ST

LAKESHORE RD E

ROBE

RT B

ROW

N BL

VD

DRYDEN AVE

GARLAN D

C R ES

VICTORIA ST

MIKALDARD

N RIDGE TR

GROSV EN

OR

ST

REBECCA ST

LONGMOOR

DR

DUNDAS ST E

STEVENSONRD

FORS

YTH

EST

DAVIS RD

REYN

OLD

S ST

JENN

AVE

RIDGE DR

TAUN

TON

RD

HOP KINS

DR

WIL

LIS

DR

GOO

DRA

MD

R

OA

KHAV

END

R

MA PLE AVE

KINGSW

AYDR

GLENASHTON DR

BA RTO

S DR

OXF

ORD

AVE

KESTELL

BLVD

ONTARIO ST

WAL

BY D

R

BARO

NW

OO

DDR

SENECA DR

FOTH

ERG

ILL

BLVD

POPL

ARDRW

ATSO

N A

VE

BRIDGE RD

GLEN VALLEY RD

RIVER OAKS BLVDW

PARK GLEN

AV E

WARREN DR

WYA

NDOTTE DR

TENN

YSO

NDR

BO ND ST


STEE

PL

ECHASE DR

CONSTANCE DR

MCCRANEYST

E

BURNET ST

BLOO

MFI

ELD

DR

BELYEA ST

G ULL ED GE

TR

T HOMAS ALTON BLVD

MARINE DR

DIGBY

RD

BRIDLE

W O O D

TR

LAKESHORE RD W

WILLIAM ST

BEVA

N DR

GR ANBY

DR

ARRO WHEAD RD

SANDPIPER RD

H AW T H OR NE D R

LAMPM

AN

AV E

O LD ABB EYLA

NE

ARBOUR V IEW DR

KING ST

RIVER OAKS BLVD E

YOLANDADR

RO SEWOODLAN

E

HOLTON

HTS DR

CA PEAVE

SPRUCE ST

JULI

A AV

E

GA MBLE

RD

C H E V ERIE ST

CULHAM ST

RIDGE

LNDG

LEIGHLAND AVE

IN GL EDE

NE

DR

SHER

WO

OD

HTS DR

BURG

UND

Y DR

MISSISSAG

A ST

BENNETT RD

ANDO

VER

RD

DEANE AVE

MO

RDEN

RD

COSBURNCRES

THIR

DLI

NE

BUR TO

NRD

SHO

REAC

RES

RD

DUNEDIN RD

ERIN DALE

DR

A INTR EE

TERR

GRACE DR

TUCK

DR

SEAFARE DR

BENNING TON G T

VALLEYDR

HIXON ST

BERW

ICK

DR

OAK WALK DR

TANSLEY DR

DEER RU N A VE

GIBS

ON D

R

A LBIONAVE

WED

GEW

OO

D D

R

S ARAZEN DR

BIS HOPSG T

TAYWOOD DR

GLEN

OAK

DR

LAKEVIE W

DR

S TA

NFI

ELD

DR

MAP

LEH

URST

AVE

SABE

LST

REEVES RD

WES

TMI N

STER

DR

ROBINSON ST


NEYA

GAW

A BL

VDW

OO

DALE

AVE

RANDALL ST

STRATU

SD

R

JOHN ST

CLEAVER DR

ASHB

URY

RD

LINBROOK RD

POSTRI DGE

DR

FRONT ST


CHURCH ST

DOU

GLA

S AV

E

ROYAL WINDSOR DR

COLE CRES

SSERVICE RD W

SECO

ND S

T

EIG H

THL I

NE


PINEDALE AVE

MILLER RD

FIRST

ST

IROQUOIS SHORE RD

DUNDAS ST W

POST

RD

REEVESG T

N SER V ICE

RD

W

KHAL

SA G

T

STANBU RY RD

SPEERS RD

AR

GUS RD

ERWIN RD

NO 1 SIDE RD

G REENWO

OD

C RE

S

WESTMOUNT DR

CA R

EY

RD

ROS EM OUN

TCRES

BOROSRD

S A LCOM

E

D R

WATERBRI

DG EDR

POPL

AR D

R

P LYMOUTH DR

DON

E SS L

ED R

IRON

ST

ONE DR

CAUL DERDR

PINE AVE

UPPER MIDDLE RD E

GATEW

AY

MO

NT C

L AIR

DR

WYECROFT RD

JOSH

UASCREE

KDR

INTE

RNA T

I ON A

LB L

V D

KEN

T AV

E

WIL

SON

AVE

BUCK

INGH

AM R

D

HEN

DERS

ON

RD

VERDIST

S SERVICE RD

ELTO

NPK

RD

BURNHAMTHORPE RD W

DUNDAS ST

OA K

C

RES

PACI

FIC

RD

SAVOYCRES

TREM

AIN

E RD

CO VE NT RY RD

PROG

R ESS

CT

GLEN ABBE Y GT

BERYL RD

HWY 407

HWY 407

INDUST RY

ST

JEZERO

CRES

ADAIR

C R E S

BALS

AM

DR

BRIGHTON RD

PORTLAND DR

I NV

I C

TA DR

HOSP

ITAL G

T

MELVIN AVE

REDW

OOD

SQ

VENE

T IA D R

COLO

N IA L

CRES

NIN

TH L

INE

HARRIS ON

CT

HW

Y40

3

MCP HERSO

NRD

C ASTL EF

I

ELDCRES

PALETTAC

T

P A L LA

DIUM WAY

SUPERIOR CT

NO 2 SIDE RD

FOURTH LINE

BELL

SCH

OO

L LI

NE

NSH

ER

IDAN WAY

IT ABASH I WAY

BURNHAMTHORPE RD E

WAL

KER'

SLI

NE

PATH

FIN

DE

R DR

DORVAL DR

BRAYS

LANE

TRAILSIDE

DR

E ST

QU

EEN

MAR

Y DR

TAY

L OR CRE S

RIVE

RVIEWST

SUTT

ON

DR

NAUTICAL BLVD

VALLE YR IDGE

DR

MO

HAWK

R D

NAVY

ST

CROSS AVE

NOTT

ING

HIL

LG

T

W YNTENW

AY

DE VON RD

ALLA

N S

T

WIN

T ERB

OUR NEDR

FORD

DR

LEES

LAN

E

SUN

SET

DR

HEN

DER

SON

RD

WHITEO

AKSBLVD

BLUE SPRUCE AVE

DEER

HURS

TDR

CREE

KPA

TH

AVE

CORP

ORA

TE D

R

GRAND BLVD

POSTMASTER

DR

MILLCROFT PK DR

GRAND RAVINE DR

HERITAGEW

AY

SAN

DLE

WO

OD

RDRIVE RSID

ED

R

GRA

NDO

AKT R


END

R

MEADOWHILL

RD

TOWNE BLVD

RIV E

RBANK W AY

FOU

RTH

LIN

E

CHIS

HOLM

ST

K W

INTE

RRD

NIC

HOLS

DR

MA

DDE N

BLVD

TURNB ERRY

RD

FALGARWOOD DR

BAYSHIR E

DR

PILGRIM

S WAY

SALE

M R

D

STRATT O

N

RD

DUNV EGAN AV E

PINEGROVE RD

SE ATON

DR

STATIO

NM

ASTER

LAN E

ELIZ

A CR

ESB RID

L E

WOOD

DUNCAN RD

CL

UBVIEW DR

WIC

K LO W

R D

SAND

WEL

L D

R

GA

BLE DR

WO

O DH A

V EN

PKDR

PROU

DFO

OT

TR

C AR OL

RD

WINSTON

RD

OA

K PK BLVD

TRAC

INA

DR

TRUM

AN A

VE

HIDD ENTR

BRISTOL CIRC

CRE EKSIDE

DR

CRE S

T MON

TDR

THEL

MA

ST

BING

LEY

CR ES

ARM

OUR CRES

LINDS

AYD

R

HILL

ST

JOHN LUCAS DR

FIELDCREST LANE

PHOE

BE C

RES

S SERVICE RD E

PEN ST

CLEA

R VIE

WDR

OLD

BRO

NTE

RD

RAYNE AVE

N SERVICE R D E

ZEN

ON

DR

S SHERIDAN WAY

HERI

TAGE RD

THE CANADIAN RD

LYNDHURS

TDR

APPL

EBY

L IN

E

QUEEN ELIZABETH WAY

HIG

HW

AY 403

HIGHWAY 407

CORP LYLA

AQUI

ASCN

PATR

SHOJ

ANNE

CHRS

ELIZ

OLPO

ANDR

JOHO

MARG

MICH

MOTH

POPE

BERN

JOAN

MATT

HLYF

DOMI

STJAJOSO

LUKE

VINC

MARY

V31

P35

L3

K3L9 L7

M9

K8

K9

N9

L6

M4

M1

L4

L16

L18

L19 M20

K24

M21K21

K20

I37

W23

O8

O9

P3

P6 Q4

R7

R10 S15

S17

S8

U14

V14

W11

W14

X14Y20

Y13

T18

U17

W24

W25

V19

U19

U21U20

U22U23

U25

T20

T25

T24P26P25

S21

S18

S19

S20

P10

P19

P20

P21

P27

P22

V23

I38 V24P30

K16

O20

O21

O18

M22

P23

T21

W22

V17Y21

K26

U24

N1 O7

Q10

U16T14

P28

W21

V20

P24

W26W20

¯

Tow

n of

Oak

ville


CURRENT BOUNDARIES

0 1 2 3 4KMs


City

of B

urlin

gton

Town of Milton

Town of Oakville

City

of M

issi

ssau

ga

Tow

n of

Oak

ville

N

SER V

ICE

RD

SOLIN

GATE

DR

BURL

OAK

DR

HARVESTER RD

TRAFALGAR

RD

TRAF

ALGA

R RD

B RO

NT E

RD

MAINWAY

RAND O LPHC

RES

APPL

EBY

LIN

E

REGI

ON

AL R

D 25

KERR

ST

CHAR

TWEL

L RD

DES JARDINES DR

ELMWO OD RD

SPRUCE AVE

SIXTEEN MILE DR

KAITING TR

NEW ST

W ST

GATW

ICK DR

PINEHURST

DRM

APLE

GRO

VE D

R

REBECCA ST

CORNWALL RD

N PK BLVD

LAKESHORE RD

SIXT

H L

INE

WIN

STO

N C

HURC

HIL

L BL

VD

WEM BLEY

RD

GLA

DES IDE

AVE

SOVEREIGN ST

RIVER GLEN BLVD

MO

RRIS

ON

RD

CRAIGL EITH RD

EL MRD

MERIC O URT RD

FAIRVIEW ST

LAKESHORE RD E

ROBE

RT B

ROW

N BL

VD

DRYDEN AVE

GARLAN D

C R ES

VICTORIA ST

MIKALDARD

N RIDGE TR

GROSV EN

OR

ST

REBECCA ST

LONGMOOR

DR

DUNDAS ST E

STEVENSONRD

FORS

YTH

EST

DAVIS RD

REYN

OLD

S ST

JENN

AVE

RIDGE DR

TAUN

TON

RD

HOP KINS

DR

WIL

LIS

DR

GOO

DRA

MD

R

OA

KHAV

END

R

MA PLE AVE

KINGSW

AYDR

GLENASHTON DR

BA RTO

S DR

OXF

ORD

AVE

KESTELL

BLVD

ONTARIO ST

WAL

BY D

R

BARO

NW

OO

DDR

SENECA DR

FOTH

ERG

ILL

BLVD

POPL

ARDRW

ATSO

N A

VE

BRIDGE RD

GLEN VALLEY RD

RIVER OAKS BLVDW

PARK GLEN

AV E

WARREN DR

WYA

NDOTTE DR

TENN

YSO

NDR

BO ND ST


STEE

PL

ECHASE DR

CONSTANCE DR

MCCRANEYST

E

BURNET ST

BLOO

MFI

ELD

DR

BELYEA ST

G ULL ED GE

TR

T HOMAS ALTON BLVD

MARINE DR

DIGBY

RD

BRIDLE

W O O D

TR

LAKESHORE RD W

WILLIAM ST

BEVA

N DR

GR ANBY

DR

ARRO WHEAD RD

SANDPIPER RD

H AW T H OR NE D R

LAMPM

AN

AV E

O LD ABB EYLA

NE

ARBOUR V IEW DR

KING ST

RIVER OAKS BLVD E

YOLANDADR

RO SEWOODLAN

E

HOLTON

HTS DR

CA PEAVE

SPRUCE ST

JULI

A AV

E

GA MBLE

RD

C H E V ERIE ST

CULHAM ST

RIDGE

LNDG

LEIGHLAND AVE

IN GL EDE

NE

DR

SHER

WO

OD

HTS DR

BURG

UND

Y DR

MISSISSAG

A ST

BENNETT RD

ANDO

VER

RD

DEANE AVE

MO

RDEN

RD

COSBURNCRES

THIR

DLI

NE

BUR TO

NRD

SHO

REAC

RES

RD

DUNEDIN RD

ERIN DALE

DR

A INTR EE

TERR

GRACE DR

TUCK

DR

SEAFARE DR

BENNING TON G T

VALLEYDR

HIXON ST

BERW

ICK

DR

OAK WALK DR

TANSLEY DR

DEER RU N A VE

GIBS

ON D

R

A LBIONAVE

WED

GEW

OO

D D

R

S ARAZEN DR

BIS HOPSG T

TAYWOOD DR

GLEN

OAK

DR

LAKEVIE W

DR

S TA

NFI

ELD

DR

MAP

LEH

URST

AVE

SABE

LST

REEVES RD

WES

TMI N

STER

DR

ROBINSON ST


NEYA

GAW

A BL

VDW

OO

DALE

AVE

RANDALL ST

STRATU

SD

R

JOHN ST

CLEAVER DR

ASHB

URY

RD

LINBROOK RD

POSTRI DGE

DR

FRONT ST


CHURCH ST

DOU

GLA

S AV

E

ROYAL WINDSOR DR

COLE CRES

SSERVICE RD W

SECO

ND S

T

EIG H

THL I

NE


PINEDALE AVE

MILLER RD

FIRST

ST

IROQUOIS SHORE RD

DUNDAS ST W

POST

RD

REEVESG T

N SER V ICE

RD

W

KHAL

SA G

T

STANBU RY RD

SPEERS RD

AR

GUS RD

ERWIN RD

NO 1 SIDE RD

G REENWO

OD

C RE

S

WESTMOUNT DR

CA R

EYRD

ROS EM OUN

TCRES

BOROSRD

S A LCOM

E

D R

WATERBRI

DG EDR

POPL

AR D

R

P LYMOUTH DR

DON

E SS L

ED R

IRON

ST

ONE DR

CAUL DERDR

PINE AVE

UPPER MIDDLE RD E

GATEW

AY

MO

NT C

L AIR

DR

WYECROFT RD

JOSH

UASCREE

KDR

INTE

RNA T

I ON A

LB L

V D

KEN

T AV

E

WIL

SON

AVE

BUCK

INGH

AM R

D

HEN

DERS

ON

RD

VERDIST

S SERVICE RD

ELTO

NPK

RD

BURNHAMTHORPE RD W

DUNDAS ST

OA K

C

RES

PACI

FIC

RD

SAVOYCRES

TREM

AIN

E RD

CO VE NT RY RD

PROG

R ESS

CT

GLEN ABBE Y GT

BERYL RD

HWY 407

HWY 407

INDUST RY

ST

JEZERO

CRES

ADAIR

C R E S

BALS

AM

DR

BRIGHTON RD

PORTLAND DR

I NV

I C

TA DR

HOSP

ITAL G

T

MELVIN AVE

REDW

OOD

SQ

VENE

T IA D R

COLO

N IA L

CRES

NIN

TH L

INE

HARRIS ON

CT

HW

Y40

3

MCP HERSO

NRD

C ASTL EF

I

ELDCRES

PALETTAC

T

P A L LA

DIUM WAY

SUPERIOR CT

NO 2 SIDE RD

FOURTH LINE

BELL

SCH

OO

L LI

NE

NSH

ER

IDAN WAY

IT ABASH I WAY

BURNHAMTHORPE RD E

WAL

KER'

SLI

NE

PATH

FIN

DE

R DR

DORVAL DR

BRAYS

LANE

TRAILSIDE

DR

E ST

QU

EEN

MAR

Y DR

TAY

L OR CRE S

RIVE

RVIEWST

SUTT

ON

DR

NAUTICAL BLVD

VALLE YR IDGE

DR

MO

HAWK

R D

NAVY

ST

CROSS AVE

NOTT

ING

HIL

LG

T

W YNTENW

AY

DE VON RD

ALLA

N S

T

WIN

T ERB

OUR NEDR

FORD

DR

LEES

LAN

E

SUN

SET

DR

HEN

DER

SON

RD

WHITEO

AKSBLVD

BLUE SPRUCE AVE

DEER

HURS

TDR

CREE

KPA

TH

AVE

CORP

ORA

TE D

R

GRAND BLVD

POSTMASTER

DR

MILLCROFT PK DR

GRAND RAVINE DR

HERITAGEW

AY

SAN

DLE

WO

OD

RDRIVE RSID

ED

R

GRA

NDO

AKT R


END

R

MEADOWHILL

RD

TOWNE BLVD

RIV E

RBANK W AY

FOU

RTH

LIN

E

CHIS

HOLM

ST

K W

INTE

RRD

NIC

HOLS

DR

MA

DDE N

BLVD

TURNB ERRY

RD

FALGARWOOD DR

BAYSHIR E

DR

PILGRIM

S WAY

SALE

M R

D

STRATT O

N

RD

DUNV EGAN AV E

PINEGROVE RD

SE ATON

DR

STATIO

NM

ASTER

LAN E

ELIZ

A CR

ESB RID

L E

WOOD

DUNCAN RD

CL

UBVIEW DR

WIC

K LO W

R D

SAND

WEL

L D

R

GA

BLE DR

WO

O DH A

V EN

PKDR

PROU

DFO

OT

TR

C AR OL

RD

WINSTON

RD

OA

K PK BLVD

TRAC

INA

DR

TRUM

AN A

VE

HIDD ENTR

BRISTOL CIRC

CRE EKSIDE

DR

CRE S

T MON

TDR

THEL

MA

ST

BING

LEY

CR ES

ARM

OUR CRES

LINDS

AYD

R

HILL

ST

JOHN LUCAS DR

FIELDCREST LANE

PHOE

BE C

RES

S SERVICE RD E

PEN ST

CLEA

R VIE

WDR

OLD

BRO

NTE

RD

RAYNE AVE

N SERVICE R D E

ZEN

ON

DR

S SHERIDAN WAY

HERI

TAGE RD

THE CANADIAN RD

LYNDHURS

TDR

APPL

EBY

L IN

E

QUEEN ELIZABETH WAY

HIG

HW

AY 403

HIGHWAY 407

CORP LYLA

AQUI

ASCN

PATR

SHOJ

ANNE

CHRS

ELIZ

OLPO

ANDR

JOHO

MARG

MICH

MOTH

POPE

BERN

JOAN

MATT

HLYF

DOMI

STJAJOSO

LUKE

VINC

MARY

V31

P35

L3

K3L9 L7

M9

K8

K9

N9

L6

M4

M1

L4

L16

L18

L19 M20

K24

M21K21

K20

I37

W23

O8

O9

P3

P6 Q4

R7

R10 S15

S17

S8

U14

V14

W11

W14

X14Y20

Y13

T18

U17

W24

W25

V19

U19

U21U20

U22U23

U25

T20

T25

T24P26P25

S21

S18

S19

S20

P10

P19

P20

P21

P27

P22

V23

I38 V24P30

K16

O20

O21

O18

M22

P23

T21

W22

V17Y21

K26

U24

N1 O7

Q10

U16T14

P28

W21

V20

P24

W26W20

¯

Tow

n of

Oak

ville


CURRENT BOUNDARIES

0 1 2 3 4KMs


City

of B

urlin

gton

Town of Milton

Town of Oakville

City

of M

issi

ssau

ga

Tow

n of

Oak

ville

N

SER V

ICE

RD

SOLIN

GATE

DR

BURL

OAK

DR

HARVESTER RD

TRAFALGAR

RD

TRAF

ALGA

R RD

B RO

NT E

RD

MAINWAY

RAND O LPHC

RES

APPL

EBY

LIN

E

REGI

ON

AL R

D 25

KERR

ST

CHAR

TWEL

L RD

DES JARDINES DR

ELMWO OD RD

SPRUCE AVE

SIXTEEN MILE DR

KAITING TR

NEW ST

W ST

GATW

ICK DR

PINEHURST

DRM

APLE

GRO

VE D

R

REBECCA ST

CORNWALL RD

N PK BLVD

LAKESHORE RD

SIXT

H L

INE

WIN

STO

N C

HURC

HIL

L BL

VD

WEM BLEY

RD

GLA

DES IDE

AVE

SOVEREIGN ST

RIVER GLEN BLVD

MO

RRIS

ON

RD

CRAIGL EITH RD

EL MRD

MERIC O URT RD

FAIRVIEW ST

LAKESHORE RD E

ROBE

RT B

ROW

N BL

VD

DRYDEN AVE

GARLAN D

C R ES

VICTORIA ST

MIKALDARD

N RIDGE TR

GROSV EN

OR

ST

REBECCA ST

LONGMOOR

DR

DUNDAS ST E

STEVENSONRD

FORS

YTH

EST

DAVIS RD

REYN

OLD

S ST

JENN

AVE

RIDGE DR

TAUN

TON

RD

HOP KINS

DR

WIL

LIS

DR

GOO

DRA

MD

R

OA

KHAV

END

R

MA PLE AVE

KINGSW

AYDR

GLENASHTON DR

BA RTO

S DR

OXF

ORD

AVE

KESTELL

BLVD

ONTARIO ST

WAL

BY D

R

BARO

NW

OO

DDR

SENECA DR

FOTH

ERG

ILL

BLVD

POPL

ARDRW

ATSO

N A

VE

BRIDGE RD

GLEN VALLEY RD

RIVER OAKS BLVDW

PARK GLEN

AV E

WARREN DR

WYA

NDOTTE DR

TENN

YSO

NDR

BO ND ST


STEE

PL

ECHASE DR

CONSTANCE DR

MCCRANEYST

E

BURNET ST

BLOO

MFI

ELD

DR

BELYEA ST

G ULL ED GE

TR

T HOMAS ALTON BLVD

MARINE DR

DIGBY

RD

BRIDLE

W O O D

TR

LAKESHORE RD W

WILLIAM ST

BEVA

N DR

GR ANBY

DR

ARRO WHEAD RD

SANDPIPER RD

H AW T H OR NE D R

LAMPM

AN

AV E

O LD ABB EYLA

NE

ARBOUR V IEW DR

KING ST

RIVER OAKS BLVD E

YOLANDADR

RO SEWOODLAN

E

HOLTON

HTS DR

CA PEAVE

SPRUCE ST

JULI

A AV

E

GA MBLE

RD

C H E V ERIE ST

CULHAM ST

RIDGE

LNDG

LEIGHLAND AVE

IN GL EDE

NE

DR

SHER

WO

OD

HTS DR

BURG

UND

Y DR

MISSISSAG

A ST

BENNETT RD

ANDO

VER

RD

DEANE AVE

MO

RDEN

RD

COSBURNCRES

THIR

DLI

NE

BUR TO

NRD

SHO

REAC

RES

RD

DUNEDIN RD

ERIN DALE

DR

A INTR EE

TERR

GRACE DR

TUCK

DR

SEAFARE DR

BENNING TON G T

VALLEYDR

HIXON ST

BERW

ICK

DR

OAK WALK DR

TANSLEY DR

DEER RU N A VE

GIBS

ON D

R

A LBIONAVE

WED

GEW

OO

D D

R

S ARAZEN DR

BIS HOPSG T

TAYWOOD DR

GLEN

OAK

DR

LAKEVIE W

DR

S TA

NFI

ELD

DR

MAP

LEH

URST

AVE

SABE

LST

REEVES RD

WES

TMI N

STER

DR

ROBINSON ST


NEYA

GAW

A BL

VDW

OO

DALE

AVE

RANDALL ST

STRATU

SD

R

JOHN ST

CLEAVER DR

ASHB

URY

RD

LINBROOK RD

POSTRI DGE

DR

FRONT ST


CHURCH ST

DOU

GLA

S AV

E

ROYAL WINDSOR DR

COLE CRES

SSERVICE RD W

SECO

ND S

T

EIG H

THL I

NE


PINEDALE AVE

MILLER RD

FIRST

ST

IROQUOIS SHORE RD

DUNDAS ST W

POST

RD

REEVESG T

N SER V ICE

RD

W

KHAL

SA G

T

STANBU RY RD

SPEERS RD

AR

GUS RD

ERWIN RD

NO 1 SIDE RD

G REENWO

OD

C RE

S

WESTMOUNT DR

CA R

EY

RD

ROS EM OUN

TCRES

BOROSRD

S A LCOM

E

D R

WATERBRI

DG EDR

POPL

AR D

R

P LYMOUTH DR

DON

E SS L

ED R

IRON

ST

ONE DR

CAUL DERDR

PINE AVE

UPPER MIDDLE RD E

GATEW

AY

MO

NT C

L AIR

DR

WYECROFT RD

JOSH

UASCREE

KDR

INTE

RNA T

I ON A

LB L

V D

KEN

T AV

E

WIL

SON

AVE

BUCK

INGH

AM R

D

HEN

DERS

ON

RD

VERDIST

S SERVICE RD

ELTO

NPK

RD

BURNHAMTHORPE RD W

DUNDAS ST

OA K

C

RES

PACI

FIC

RD

SAVOYCRES

TREM

AIN

E RD

CO VE NT RY RD

PROG

R ESS

CT

GLEN ABBE Y GT

BERYL RD

HWY 407

HWY 407

INDUST RY

ST

JEZERO

CRES

ADAIR

C R E S

BALS

AM

DR

BRIGHTON RD

PORTLAND DR

I NV

I C

TA DR

HOSP

ITAL G

T

MELVIN AVE

REDW

OOD

SQ

VENE

T IA D R

COLO

N IA L

CRES

NIN

TH L

INE

HARRIS ON

CT

HW

Y40

3

MCP HERSO

NRD

C ASTL EF

I

ELDCRES

PALETTAC

T

P A L LA

DIUM WAY

SUPERIOR CT

NO 2 SIDE RD

FOURTH LINE

BELL

SCH

OO

L LI

NE

NSH

ER

IDAN WAY

IT ABASH I WAY

BURNHAMTHORPE RD E

WAL

KER'

SLI

NE

PATH

FIN

DE

R DR

DORVAL DR

BRAYS

LANE

TRAILSIDE

DR

E ST

QU

EEN

MAR

Y DR

TAY

L OR CRE S

RIVE

RVIEWST

SUTT

ON

DR

NAUTICAL BLVD

VALLE YR IDGE

DR

MO

HAWK

R D

NAVY

ST

CROSS AVE

NOTT

ING

HIL

LG

T

W YNTENW

AY

DE VON RD

ALLA

N S

T

WIN

T ERB

OUR NEDR

FORD

DR

LEES

LAN

E

SUN

SET

DR

HEN

DER

SON

RD

WHITEO

AKSBLVD

BLUE SPRUCE AVE

DEER

HURS

TDR

CREE

KPA

TH

AVE

CORP

ORA

TE D

R

GRAND BLVD

POSTMASTER

DR

MILLCROFT PK DR

GRAND RAVINE DR

HERITAGEW

AY

SAN

DLE

WO

OD

RDRIVE RSID

ED

R

GRA

NDO

AKT R


END

R

MEADOWHILL

RD

TOWNE BLVD

RIV E

RBANK W AY

FOU

RTH

LIN

E

CHIS

HOLM

ST

K W

INTE

RRD

NIC

HOLS

DR

MA

DDE N

BLVD

TURNB ERRY

RD

FALGARWOOD DR

BAYSHIR E

DR

PILGRIM

S WAY

SALE

M R

D

STRATT O

N

RD

DUNV EGAN AV E

PINEGROVE RD

SE ATON

DR

STATIO

NM

ASTER

LAN E

ELIZ

A CR

ESB RID

L E

WOOD

DUNCAN RD

CL

UBVIEW DR

WIC

K LO W

R D

SAND

WEL

L D

R

GA

BLE DR

WO

O DH A

V EN

PKDR

PROU

DFO

OT

TR

C AR OL

RD

WINSTON

RD

OA

K PK BLVD

TRAC

INA

DR

TRUM

AN A

VE

HIDD ENTR

BRISTOL CIRC

CRE EKSIDE

DR

CRE S

T MON

TDR

THEL

MA

ST

BING

LEY

CR ES

ARM

OUR CRES

LINDS

AYD

R

HILL

ST

JOHN LUCAS DR

FIELDCREST LANE

PHOE

BE C

RES

S SERVICE RD E

PEN ST

CLEA

R VIE

WDR

OLD

BRO

NTE

RD

RAYNE AVE

N SERVICE R D E

ZEN

ON

DR

S SHERIDAN WAY

HERI

TAGE RD

THE CANADIAN RD

LYNDHURS

TDR

APPL

EBY

L IN

E

QUEEN ELIZABETH WAY

HIG

HW

AY 403

HIGHWAY 407

CORP LYLA

AQUI

ASCN

PATR

SHOJ

ANNE

CHRS

ELIZ

OLPO

ANDR

JOHO

MARG

MICH

MOTH

POPE

BERN

JOAN

MATT

HLYF

DOMI

STJAJOSO

LUKE

VINC

MARY

V31

P35

L3

K3L9 L7

M9

K8

K9

N9

L6

M4

M1

L4

L16

L18

L19 M20

K24

M21K21

K20

I37

W23

O8

O9

P3

P6 Q4

R7

R10 S15

S17

S8

U14

V14

W11

W14

X14Y20

Y13

T18

U17

W24

W25

V19

U19

U21U20

U22U23

U25

T20

T25

T24P26P25

S21

S18

S19

S20

P10

P19

P20

P21

P27

P22

V23

I38 V24P30

K16

O20

O21

O18

M22

P23

T21

W22

V17Y21

K26

U24

N1 O7

Q10

U16T14

P28

W21

V20

P24

W26W20

¯

Tow

n of

Oak

ville


CURRENT BOUNDARIES

0 1 2 3 4KMs


City

of B

urlin

gton

Town of Milton

Town of Oakville

City

of M

issi

ssau

ga

Tow

n of

Oak

ville

N

SER V

ICE

RD

SOLIN

GATE

DR

BURL

OAK

DR

HARVESTER RD

TRAFALGAR

RD

TRAF

ALGA

R RD

B RO

NT E

RD

MAINWAY

RAND O LPHC

RES

APPL

EBY

LIN

E

REGI

ON

AL R

D 25

KERR

ST

CHAR

TWEL

L RD

DES JARDINES DR

ELMWO OD RD

SPRUCE AVE

SIXTEEN MILE DR

KAITING TR

NEW ST

W ST

GATW

ICK DR

PINEHURST

DRM

APLE

GRO

VE D

R

REBECCA ST

CORNWALL RD

N PK BLVD

LAKESHORE RD

SIXT

H L

INE

WIN

STO

N C

HURC

HIL

L BL

VD

WEM BLEY

RD

GLA

DES IDE

AVE

SOVEREIGN ST

RIVER GLEN BLVD

MO

RRIS

ON

RD

CRAIGL EITH RD

EL MRD

MERIC O URT RD

FAIRVIEW ST

LAKESHORE RD E

ROBE

RT B

ROW

N BL

VD

DRYDEN AVE

GARLAN D

C R ES

VICTORIA ST

MIKALDARD

N RIDGE TR

GROSV EN

OR

ST

REBECCA ST

LONGMOOR

DR

DUNDAS ST E

STEVENSONRD

FORS

YTH

EST

DAVIS RD

REYN

OLD

S ST

JENN

AVE

RIDGE DR

TAUN

TON

RD

HOP KINS

DR

WIL

LIS

DR

GOO

DRA

MD

R

OA

KHAV

END

R

MA PLE AVE

KINGSW

AYDR

GLENASHTON DR

BA RTO

S DR

OXF

ORD

AVE

KESTELL

BLVD

ONTARIO ST

WAL

BY D

R

BARO

NW

OO

DDR

SENECA DR

FOTH

ERG

ILL

BLVD

POPL

ARDRW

ATSO

N A

VE

BRIDGE RD

GLEN VALLEY RD

RIVER OAKS BLVDW

PARK GLEN

AV E

WARREN DR

WYA

NDOTTE DR

TENN

YSO

NDR

BO ND ST


STEE

PL

ECHASE DR

CONSTANCE DR

MCCRANEYST

E

BURNET ST

BLOO

MFI

ELD

DR

BELYEA ST

G ULL ED GE

TR

T HOMAS ALTON BLVD

MARINE DR

DIGBY

RD

BRIDLE

W O O D

TR

LAKESHORE RD W

WILLIAM ST

BEVA

N DR

GR ANBY

DR

ARRO WHEAD RD

SANDPIPER RD

H AW T H OR NE D R

LAMPM

AN

AV E

O LD ABB EYLA

NE

ARBOUR V IEW DR

KING ST

RIVER OAKS BLVD E

YOLANDADR

RO SEWOODLAN

E

HOLTON

HTS DR

CA PEAVE

SPRUCE ST

JULI

A AV

E

GA MBLE

RD

C H E V ERIE ST

CULHAM ST

RIDGE

LNDG

LEIGHLAND AVE

IN GL EDE

NE

DR

SHER

WO

OD

HTS DR

BURG

UND

Y DR

MISSISSAG

A ST

BENNETT RD

ANDO

VER

RD

DEANE AVE

MO

RDEN

RD

COSBURNCRES

THIR

DLI

NE

BUR TO

NRD

SHO

REAC

RES

RD

DUNEDIN RD

ERIN DALE

DR

A INTR EE

TERR

GRACE DR

TUCK

DR

SEAFARE DR

BENNING TON G T

VALLEYDR

HIXON ST

BERW

ICK

DR

OAK WALK DR

TANSLEY DR

DEER RU N A VE

GIBS

ON D

R

A LBIONAVE

WED

GEW

OO

D D

R

S ARAZEN DR

BIS HOPSG T

TAYWOOD DR

GLEN

OAK

DR

LAKEVIE W

DR

S TA

NFI

ELD

DR

MAP

LEH

URST

AVE

SABE

LST

REEVES RD

WES

TMI N

STER

DR

ROBINSON ST


NEYA

GAW

A BL

VDW

OO

DALE

AVE

RANDALL ST

STRATU

SD

R

JOHN ST

CLEAVER DR

ASHB

URY

RD

LINBROOK RD

POSTRI DGE

DR

FRONT ST


CHURCH ST

DOU

GLA

S AV

E

ROYAL WINDSOR DR

COLE CRES

SSERVICE RD W

SECO

ND S

T

EIG H

THL I

NE


PINEDALE AVE

MILLER RD

FIRST

ST

IROQUOIS SHORE RD

DUNDAS ST W

POST

RD

REEVESG T

N SER V ICE

RD

W

KHAL

SA G

T

STANBU RY RD

SPEERS RD

AR

GUS RD

ERWIN RD

NO 1 SIDE RD

G REENWO

OD

C RE

S

WESTMOUNT DR

CA R

EY

RD

ROS EM OUN

TCRES

BOROSRD

S A LCOM

E

D R

WATERBRI

DG EDR

POPL

AR D

R

P LYMOUTH DR

DON

E SS L

ED R

IRON

ST

ONE DR

CAUL DERDR

PINE AVE

UPPER MIDDLE RD E

GATEW

AY

MO

NT C

L AIR

DR

WYECROFT RD

JOSH

UASCREE

KDR

INTE

RNA T

I ON A

LB L

V D

KEN

T AV

E

WIL

SON

AVE

BUCK

INGH

AM R

D

HEN

DERS

ON

RD

VERDIST

S SERVICE RD

ELTO

NPK

RD

BURNHAMTHORPE RD W

DUNDAS ST

OA K

C

RES

PACI

FIC

RD

SAVOYCRES

TREM

AIN

E RD

CO VE NT RY RD

PROG

R ESS

CT

GLEN ABBE Y GT

BERYL RD

HWY 407

HWY 407

INDUST RY

ST

JEZERO

CRESADAIR

C R E S

BALS

AM

DR

BRIGHTON RD

PORTLAND DR

I NV

I C

TA DR

HOSP

ITAL G

T

MELVIN AVE

REDW

OOD

SQ

VENE

T IA D R

COLO

N IA L

CRES

NIN

TH L

INE

HARRIS ON

CT

HW

Y40

3

MCP HERSO

NRD

C ASTL EF

I

ELDCRES

PALETTAC

T

P A L LA

DIUM WAY

SUPERIOR CT

NO 2 SIDE RD

FOURTH LINE

BELL

SCH

OO

L LI

NE

NSH

ER

IDAN WAY

IT ABASH I WAY

BURNHAMTHORPE RD E

WAL

KER'

SLI

NE

PATH

FIN

DE

R DR

DORVAL DR

BRAYS

LANE

TRAILSIDE

DR

E ST

QU

EEN

MAR

Y DR

TAY

L OR CRE S

RIVE

RVIEWST

SUTT

ON

DR

NAUTICAL BLVD

VALLE YR IDGE

DR

MO

HAWK

R D

NAVY

ST

CROSS AVE

NOTT

ING

HIL

LG

T

W YNTENW

AY

DE VON RD

ALLA

N S

T

WIN

T ERB

OUR NEDR

FORD

DR

LEES

LAN

E

SUN

SET

DR

HEN

DER

SON

RD

WHITEO

AKSBLVD

BLUE SPRUCE AVE

DEER

HURS

TDR

CREE

KPA

TH

AVE

CORP

ORA

TE D

R

GRAND BLVD

POSTMASTER

DR

MILLCROFT PK DR

GRAND RAVINE DR

HERITAGEW

AY

SAN

DLE

WO

OD

RDRIVE RSID

ED

R

GRA

NDO

AKT R


END

R

MEADOWHILL

RD

TOWNE BLVD

RIV E

RBANK W AY

FOU

RTH

LIN

E

CHIS

HOLM

ST

K W

INTE

RRD

NIC

HOLS

DR

MA

DDE N

BLVD

TURNB ERRY

RD

FALGARWOOD DR

BAYSHIR E

DR

PILGRIM

S WAY

SALE

M R

D

STRATT O

N

RD

DUNV EGAN AV E

PINEGROVE RD

SE ATON

DR

STATIO

NM

ASTER

LAN E

ELIZ

A CR

ESB RID

L E

WOOD

DUNCAN RD

CL

UBVIEW DR

WIC

K LO W

R D

SAND

WEL

L D

R

GA

BLE DR

WO

O DH A

V EN

PKDR

PROU

DFO

OT

TR

C AR OL

RD

WINSTON

RD

OA

K PK BLVD

TRAC

INA

DR

TRUM

AN A

VE

HIDD ENTR

BRISTOL CIRC

CRE EKSIDE

DR

CRE S

T MON

TDR

THEL

MA

ST

BING

LEY

CR ES

ARM

OUR CRES

LINDS

AYD

R

HILL

ST

JOHN LUCAS DR

FIELDCREST LANE

PHOE

BE C

RES

S SERVICE RD E

PEN ST

CLEA

R VIE

WDR

OLD

BRO

NTE

RD

RAYNE AVE

N SERVICE R D E

ZEN

ON

DR

S SHERIDAN WAY

HERI

TAGE RD

THE CANADIAN RD

LYNDHURS

TDR

APPL

EBY

L IN

E

QUEEN ELIZABETH WAY

HIG

HW

AY 403

HIGHWAY 407

CORP LYLA

AQUI

ASCN

PATR

SHOJ

ANNE

CHRS

ELIZ

OLPO

ANDR

JOHO

MARG

MICH

MOTH

POPE

BERN

JOAN

MATT

HLYF

DOMI

STJAJOSO

LUKE

VINC

MARY

V31

P35

L3

K3L9 L7

M9

K8

K9

N9

L6

M4

M1

L4

L16

L18

L19 M20

K24

M21K21

K20

I37

W23

O8

O9

P3

P6 Q4

R7

R10 S15

S17

S8

U14

V14

W11

W14

X14Y20

Y13

T18

U17

W24

W25

V19

U19

U21U20

U22U23

U25

T20

T25

T24P26P25

S21

S18

S19

S20

P10

P19

P20

P21

P27

P22

V23

I38 V24P30

K16

O20

O21

O18

M22

P23

T21

W22

V17Y21

K26

U24

N1 O7

Q10

U16T14

P28

W21

V20

P24

W26W20

¯

Tow

n of

Oak

ville


CURRENT BOUNDARIES

0 1 2 3 4KMs


City

of B

urlin

gton

Town of Milton

Town of Oakville

City

of M

issi

ssau

ga

Tow

n of

Oak

ville


• DecliningenrolmentatHLYTandLYLA


• AQUIcannotaccommodateanyportablesonsite,andisnearingitsbuiltcapacity


• Potentialtore-distributehighenrolmentgrowthacrossOakvilleSecondarySchools,andreduceemptypupilplaces

Page 17290

Current Boundaries ENROLMENTCURRENT BOUNDARIES

4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19

PROGRAM 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029RT - EC 1121 1113 1045 984 942 890 825 781 772 743 783 815 817 816 798 777RT - ROND 0 10 27 32 42 45 52 56 59 60 62 63 63 63 65 66Ext FI 18 17 21 25 24 21 19 18 18 17 18 18 17 17 16 16TOTAL (IN-BOUND) 1139 1140 1094 1041 1008 955 896 855 848 821 863 896 897 896 879 859CBOUND 101 110 114 109 109 108 102 95 90 86 89 92 93 93 91 88TOTAL (IN+OUT - BOUND) 1240 1251 1208 1150 1117 1063 998 950 938 907 952 988 991 989 970 947FBC 1338 1338 1338 1338 1338 1338 1338 1338 1338 1338 1338 1338 1338 1338 1338 1338UTILIZATION (FBC) 93% 93% 90% 86% 83% 79% 75% 71% 70% 68% 71% 74% 74% 74% 72% 71%PORTABLES REQ. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0FBC + MAX PORTABLES 1614 1614 1614 1614 1614 1614 1614 1614 1614 1614 1614 1614 1614 1614 1614 1614



HLYT

LYLA

AQUI

HLY

TLY

LAAQ

UI

Page 18291

Current Boundaries ENROLMENT


1082 1095 1111 1137 1146 1121 1121 1095 1075 1078 1081 1080 1076 1067 1042 1020

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

1800

ENR

OLM

ENT

(HC

)

St. Ignatius of Loyola CSS - Enrolment Trend Current Boundaries


1240 1251 1208 1150 1117

1063 998 950 938 907 952 988 991 989 970 947

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

1800

ENR

OLM

ENT

(HC

)

Holy Trinity CSS - Enrolment Trend Current Boundaries


• DecliningenrolmentatHLYTisprojectedoverthenext15years

• Significantsurplusspace

• Aschoolatcapacitycanofferawiderrangeofprogramming

Holy Trinity CSS - Enrolment TrendCurrentBoundaries

Page 19292



1082 1095 1111 1137 1146 1121 1121 1095 1075 1078 1081 1080 1076 1067 1042 1020

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

1800

ENR

OLM

ENT

(HC

)

St. Ignatius of Loyola CSS - Enrolment Trend Current Boundaries


1240 1251 1208 1150 1117

1063 998 950 938 907 952 988 991 989 970 947

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

1800

ENR

OLM

ENT

(HC

)

Holy Trinity CSS - Enrolment Trend Current Boundaries

St. Ignatius of Loyola CSS - Enrolment TrendCurrentBoundaries


• SlightdeclinesinenrolmentatLYLAisprojectedoverthenext15years

• Significantsurplusspace

• Aschoolatcapacitycanofferawiderrangeofprogramming

Page 20293



1149 1257

1343 1448 1437 1481

1553 1634

1743 1892

2018 2102

2173 2179 2197 2221

0

250

500

750

1000

1250

1500

1750

2000

2250

2500

ENR

OLM

ENT

(HC

)

St. Thomas of Aquinas CSS - Enrolment Trend Current Boundaries

St. Thomas Aquinas CSS - Enrolment TrendCurrentBoundaries



• AQUIcannotaccommodateanyportablesonsite,andisnearingitsbuiltcapacity


• Opportunitytore-distributegrowthacrossOakvillesecondaryschools

Page 21294

OPTION 1

Page 22295

Option 1 ENROLMENT

N

SER V

ICE

RD

SOLIN

GATE

DR

HAM

P TO

NH

EATH

RD

BURL

OAK

DR

HARVESTER RD

TRAFAL GAR

RD

TRAF

ALGA

R RD

B RO

NT E

RD

MAINWAY

RAND O LPHC

RES

APPL

EBY

LIN

E

REG

I ON A

LRD

25

KERR

ST

CHAR

TWEL

L RD

DES JARDINES DR

ELMWO OD RD

SPRUCE AVE

SIXTEEN MILE DR

KAITING TR

NEW ST

W ST

GATWICK D R

PINEHURST

DRM

APLE

GRO

VE D

R

REBECCA ST

CORNWALL RD

N PK BLVD

LAKESHORE RD

SAW

GRAS

S DR

S IXT

HL I

NE

WIN

STO

N C

HURC

HIL

L BL

VD

WEM BLEY

RD

GLA

DES IDE

AVE

SOVEREIGN ST


ELM

R D

FAIRVIEW ST

LAKESHORE RD E

ROBE

RT B

ROW

N BL

VD

GARLAN D

C R ES

VICTORIA ST

MIKALDARD

N RIDGE TR

GRO

SVEN

ORST

REBECCA ST

SH ERIDAN GRD NDR

LONGMOORDR

DUNDAS ST E

STEVENSONRD

FORS

YTH

EST

REYN

OLD

S ST

JENN

AVE

RIDGE DR

TAUN

TON

RD

HOP KINS

DR

WIL

LIS

DR

GOO

DRA

MD

R

OA

KHAV

END

R

MA PLE AVE

KINGSW

AYDR

GLENASHTON DR

BA RTO

S DR

OXF

ORD

AVE

KESTELL

BLVD

ONTARIO ST

WAL

BY D

R

BROMLEY RD

BARO

NW

OOD

DR

KERRY DR

SENECA DR

FOTH

ERG

ILL

BLVD

POPL

ARDR

WAT

SON

AVE

BRIDGE RD

GLEN VALLEY RD

RIVER OAKS BLVDW

PARK GLEN

AV E

WARREN DR

WYA

NDOTTE DR

TENN

YSO

NDR

BO ND ST


STEE

PL

ECHASE DR

CONSTANCE DR

MCCRANEYST

E

BURNET ST

BLOO

MFI

ELD

DR

BELYEA ST

G ULL ED GE

TR

T HOMAS ALTON BLVD

MARINE DR

DIGBY

RD

BRIDLE

W O O D

TR

LAKESHORE RD W

WILLIAM ST

BEVA

N DR

GR ANBY

DR

ARRO WHEAD RD

SANDPIPER RD

H AW T H OR NE D R

LAMPM

AN

AV E

O LD ABB EYLA

NE

ARBOUR V IEW DR

KING ST

RIVER OAKS BLVD E

YOLANDADR

HOLTON

HTS DR

CA PEAVE

SPRUCE ST

JULI

A AV

E

GA MBLE

RD

C H E V ERIE ST

CULHAM ST

RIDGE

LNDG

LEIGHLAND AVE

IN GL EDE

NE

DR

SHER

WO

OD

HTS DR

BURG

UND

Y DR

MISSISSAG

A ST

BENNETT RD

ANDO

VER

RD

DEANE AVE

MO

RDEN

RD

COSBURNCRES

THIR

D L

INE

BUR TO

NRD

SHO

REAC

RES

RD

DUNEDIN RD

ERIN DALE

DR

A INTR EE

TERR

GRACE DR

LONG

RI

DGE CRES

TUCK

DR

SEAFARE DR

BENNING TON G T

VALLEYDR

HIXON ST

BERW

ICK

DR

OAK WALK DR

TANSLEY DR

DEER RU N A VE

GIBS

ON D

R

A LBIONAVE

NIPIGO

N DR

WED

GEW

OO

D D

R

S ARAZEN DR

BIS HOPSG T

TAYWOOD DR

GLEN

OAK

DR

LAKEVIE W

DR

S TAN

FIE L

DDR

MAP

LEH

URST

AVE

SABE

LST

REEVES RD

WES

TMI N

STER

DR

ROBINSON ST


NEYA

GAW

A BL

VDW

OO

DALE

AVE

RANDALL ST

STRATU

SD R

JOHN ST

CLEAVER DR

ASHB

URY

RD

LINBROOK RD

POSTRI DGE

DR

FRONT ST


CHURCH ST

DOU

GLA

S AV

E

ROYAL WINDSOR DR

COLE CRES

SSERVICE RD W

SECO

ND S

T

EIG

HTH

LIN

E


PINEDALE AVE

MILLER RD

FIRST

ST

IROQUOIS SHORE RD


POST

RD

REEVESG T

N SERVICE RD W

KHAL

SA G

T

STANBU RY RD

SPEERS RD

AR

GUS RD

ERWIN RD

NO 1 SIDE RD

G REENWO

OD

C RE

S

WESTMOUNT DR

CA R

EY

RD

ROS EM OUN

TCRES

BOROSRD

S A LCOM

E

D R

WATERBRI

DG EDR

POPL

AR D

R

PL YMOUTH DR

DON

E SS L

ED R

IRON

ST

ONE DR

CAUL DERDR

PINE AVE

UPPER MIDDLE RD E

GATEW

AY

MO

NT C

L AIR

DR

WYECROFT RD

JOSH

UASCREE K

DR

INTE

RNA T

I ON A

LB L

V D

KEN

T AV

E

WIL

SON

AVE

BUCK

INGH

AM R

D

HEN

DERS

ON

RD

VERDIST

ELTO

NPK

RD

BURNHAMTHORPE RD W

DUNDAS ST

OA K

C

RES

PACI

FIC

RD

SAVOYCRES

TREM

AIN

E RD

CO VE NT RY RD

PROG

R ESS

CT

GLEN ABBE Y GT

BERYL RD

HWY 407

HWY 407

INDUST RY

ST

JEZERO

CRES

ADAIR

C R E S

BALS

AM

DR

BRIGHTON RD

PORTLAND DR

I NV

I C

TA DR

HOSP

ITAL G

T

CEN

TURY

DR

MELVIN AVE

SYSCON

R D

REDW

OOD

SQ

VENE

T IA D R

COLO

N IA L

CRES

NIN

TH L

INE

HARRIS ON

CT

HWY

403

MCP HERSO

NRD

C ASTL EF

I

ELDCRES

PALETTACT

PALLADIUM WAY

SUPERIOR CT

NO 2 SIDE RD

FOURTH LINE

BELL

SCH

OO

L LI

NE

NSH

ER

IDAN WAY

IT ABASH I WAY

BURNHAMTHORPE RD E

WAL

KER'

SLI

NE

PATH

F IND

ER DR

DORVALDR

BRAYS

LANE

TRAILSIDE

DR

E ST

QU

EEN

MAR

Y DR

TAY

L OR CRE S

RIVE

RVIEWST

SUTTO

ND

R

PINERY CRE S

NAUTICAL BLVD

VALLE YR IDG

ED

R

MO

HAWK

R D

NAVY

ST

CROSS AVE

NOTT

ING

HIL

LG

T

W YNTENW

AY

DEVON RD

ALLA

N S

T

WIN

T ERB

OUR NEDR

FORD

DR

LEES

LAN

E

SUN

SET

DR

HEN

DER

SON

RD

WHITEO

AKSBLVD

B LUE SPRUCE AVE

DEER

HURS

TDR

CREE

KPA

TH

AVE

CORP

ORA

TE D

R

GRAND

BLVD

POSTMASTER

DR

MILLCROFT PK DR

GRAND RAVINE DR

HERITAGEW

AY

SAN

DLE

WO

OD

RDRIVE RSID

ED

R

GRAN

DO

AKTR

FALLIN G GRE

END

R

MEADOWHILL

RD

TOWNE BLVD

RIV E

RBANK W AY

FOU

RTH

LIN

E

CHIS

HOLM

ST

K W

INTE

RRD

NIC

HOLS

DR

MA

DDE N

BLVD

TURNB ERRY

RD

FALGARWOOD DR

BAYSHIR E

DR

PILGRIM

S WAY

SALE

M R

D

STRATT O

N

RD

DUNV EGAN AV E

PINEGROVE RD

SE ATON

DR

STATIO

NM

ASTER

LAN E

ELIZ

A CR

ESB RID

L E

WOOD

DUNCAN RD

CL

UBVIEW DR

WIC

K LO W

R D

SAND

WEL

L D

R

GA

BLE DR

WO

O DH A

V EN

PKDR

PROUDFOO

TTR

C AR OL

RD

WINSTON

RD

TRAC

INA

DR

TRUM

AN A

VE

HIDD ENTR

BRISTOL CIRC

CRE EKSIDEDR

C RE S

T MON

TDR

PK A

VE

THEL

MA

ST

BING

LEY

CR ES

ARM

OUR CRES

LINDS

AYD

R

HILL

ST

JOHN LUCAS DR

FIELDCREST LANE

PHOE

BE C

RES

S SERVICE RD E

PEN ST

CLEA

R VIE

WDR

OLD

BRO

NTE

RD

S SERVICE RD

RAYNE AVE

N SERVICE RD E

ZEN

ON

DR

S SHERIDAN WAY

HERI

TAGE RD

THE CANADIAN RD

APPL

EBY

L IN

E

QUEEN ELIZ

ABETH W

AY

HIG

HW

AY 403

HIGHWAY 407

ASCN

PATR

SHOJ

ANNE

CHRS

ELIZ

OLPO

ANDR

JOHO

MARG

MICH

MOTH

POPE

BERN

JOAN

MATT

HLYF

DOMI

STJAJOSO

LUKE

VINC

MARY

V31

P35

L3

K3

L9

L7

M9

K8

K9

N9

L6

M4

M1

L4

L16

L18

L19 M20

K24

M21K21

K20

I37

W23

O8

O9

P3

P6 Q4

R7

R10 S15

S17

S8

U14

V14

W11

W14

X14 Y20

Y13

T18

U17

W24

W25

V19

U19

U21

U20U22

U25

T20

T25

T24

P26P25

S21

S18

S19

S20

P10

P19

P20

P21

P27

P22

V23

I38

V24P30

K16

O20

O21

O18

M22

P23

T21

W22

V17Y21

K26

U24

N1 O7

Q10

U16T14

P28

W21

V20

P24

W26

W20

CORP

HLYT

LYLA

AQUI

¯

Tow

n of

Oak

ville


OPTION #1A

0 1 2 3 4KMs

City

of B

urlin

gton

Town of Milton

Town of Oakville

City

of M

issi

ssau

ga

Tow

n of

Oak

ville


N

SER V

ICE

RD

SOLIN

GATE

DR

BURL

OAK

DR

HARVESTER RD

TRAFALGAR

RD

TRAF

ALGA

R RD

B RO

NT E

RD

MAINWAY

RAND O LPHC

RES

APPL

EBY

LIN

E

REGI

ON

AL R

D 25

KERR

ST

CHAR

TWEL

L RD

DES JARDINES DR

ELMWO OD RD

SPRUCE AVE

SIXTEEN MILE DR

KAITING TR

NEW ST

W ST

GATW

ICK DR

PINEHURST

DRM

APLE

GRO

VE D

R

REBECCA ST

CORNWALL RD

N PK BLVD

LAKESHORE RD

SIXT

H L

INE

WIN

STO

N C

HURC

HIL

L BL

VD

WEM BLEY

RD

GLA

DES IDE

AVE

SOVEREIGN ST

RIVER GLEN BLVD

MO

RRIS

ON

RD

CRAIGL EITH RD

EL MRD

MERIC O URT RD

FAIRVIEW ST

LAKESHORE RD E

ROBE

RT B

ROW

N BL

VD

DRYDEN AVE

GARLAN D

C R ES

VICTORIA ST

MIKALDARD

N RIDGE TR

GROSV EN

OR

ST

REBECCA ST

LONGMOOR

DR

DUNDAS ST E

STEVENSONRD

FORS

YTH

EST

DAVIS RD

REYN

OLD

S ST

JENN

AVE

RIDGE DR

TAUN

TON

RD

HOP KINS

DR

WIL

LIS

DR

GOO

DRA

MD

R

OA

KHAV

END

R

MA PLE AVE

KINGSW

AYDR

GLENASHTON DR

BA RTO

S DR

OXF

ORD

AVE

KESTELL

BLVD

ONTARIO ST

WAL

BY D

R

BARO

NW

OO

DDR

SENECA DR

FOTH

ERG

ILL

BLVD

POPL

ARDRW

ATSO

N A

VE

BRIDGE RD

GLEN VALLEY RD

RIVER OAKS BLVDW

PARK GLEN

AV E

WARREN DR

WYA

NDOTTE DR

TENN

YSO

NDR

BO ND ST


STEE

PL

ECHASE DR

CONSTANCE DR

MCCRANEYST

E

BURNET ST

BLOO

MFI

ELD

DR

BELYEA ST

G ULL ED GE

TR

T HOMAS ALTON BLVD

MARINE DR

DIGBY

RD

BRIDLE

W O O D

TR

LAKESHORE RD W

WILLIAM ST

BEVA

N DR

GR ANBY

DR

ARRO WHEAD RD

SANDPIPER RD

H AW T H OR NE D R

LAMPM

AN

AV E

O LD ABB EYLA

NE

ARBOUR V IEW DR

KING ST

RIVER OAKS BLVD E

YOLANDADR

RO SEWOODLAN

E

HOLTON

HTS DR

CA PEAVE

SPRUCE ST

JULI

A AV

E

GA MBLE

RD

C H E V ERIE ST

CULHAM ST

RIDGE

LNDG

LEIGHLAND AVE

IN GL EDE

NE

DR

SHER

WO

OD

HTS DR

BURG

UND

Y DR

MISSISSAG

A ST

BENNETT RD

ANDO

VER

RD

DEANE AVE

MO

RDEN

RD

COSBURNCRES

THIR

DLI

NE

BUR TO

NRD

SHO

REAC

RES

RD

DUNEDIN RD

ERIN DALE

DR

A INTR EE

TERR

GRACE DR

TUCK

DR

SEAFARE DR

BENNING TON G T

VALLEYDR

HIXON ST

BERW

ICK

DR

OAK WALK DR

TANSLEY DR

DEER RU N A VE

GIBS

ON D

R

A LBIONAVE

WED

GEW

OO

D D

R

S ARAZEN DR

BIS HOPSG T

TAYWOOD DR

GLEN

OAK

DR

LAKEVIE W

DR

S TA

NFI

ELD

DR

MAP

LEH

URST

AVE

SABE

LST

REEVES RD

WES

TMI N

STER

DR

ROBINSON ST


NEYA

GAW

A BL

VDW

OO

DALE

AVE

RANDALL ST

STRATU

SD

R

JOHN ST

CLEAVER DR

ASHB

URY

RD

LINBROOK RD

POSTRI DGE

DR

FRONT ST


CHURCH ST

DOU

GLA

S AV

E

ROYAL WINDSOR DR

COLE CRES

SSERVICE RD W

SECO

ND S

T

EIG H

THL I

NE


PINEDALE AVE

MILLER RD

FIRST

ST

IROQUOIS SHORE RD

DUNDAS ST W

POST

RD

REEVESG T

N SER V ICE

RD

W

KHAL

SA G

T

STANBU RY RD

SPEERS RD

AR

GUS RD

ERWIN RD

NO 1 SIDE RD

G REENWO

OD

C RE

S

WESTMOUNT DR

CA R

EY

RD

ROS EM OUN

TCRES

BOROSRD

S A LCOM

E

D R

WATERBRI

DG EDR

POPL

AR D

R

P LYMOUTH DR

DON

E SS L

ED R

IRON

ST

ONE DR

CAUL DERDR

PINE AVE

UPPER MIDDLE RD E

GATEW

AY

MO

NT C

L AIR

DR

WYECROFT RD

JOSH

UASCREE

KDR

INTE

RNA T

I ON A

LB L

V D

KEN

T AV

E

WIL

SON

AVE

BUCK

INGH

AM R

D

HEN

DERS

ON

RD

VERDIST

S SERVICE RD

ELTO

NPK

RD

BURNHAMTHORPE RD W

DUNDAS ST

OA K

C

RES

PACI

FIC

RD

SAVOYCRES

TREM

AIN

E RD

CO VE NT RY RD

PROG

R ESS

CT

GLEN ABBE Y GT

BERYL RD

HWY 407

HWY 407

INDUST RY

ST

JEZERO

CRES

ADAIR

C R E S

BALS

AM

DR

BRIGHTON RD

PORTLAND DR

I NV

I C

TA DR

HOSP

ITAL G

T

MELVIN AVE

REDW

OOD

SQ

VENE

T IA D R

COLO

N IA L

CRES

NIN

TH L

INE

HARRIS ON

CT

HW

Y40

3

MCP HERSO

NRD

C ASTL EF

I

ELDCRES

PALETTAC

T

P A L LA

DIUM WAY

SUPERIOR CT

NO 2 SIDE RD

FOURTH LINE

BELL

SCH

OO

L LI

NE

NSH

ER

IDAN WAY

IT ABASH I WAY

BURNHAMTHORPE RD E

WAL

KER'

SLI

NE

PATH

FIN

DE

R DR

DORVAL DR

BRAYS

LANE

TRAILSIDE

DR

E ST

QU

EEN

MAR

Y DR

TAY

L OR CRE S

RIVE

RVIEWST

SUTT

ON

DR

NAUTICAL BLVD

VALLE YR IDGE

DR

MO

HAWK

R D

NAVY

ST

CROSS AVE

NOTT

ING

HIL

LG

T

W YNTENW

AY

DE VON RD

ALLA

N S

T

WIN

T ERB

OUR NEDR

FORD

DR

LEES

LAN

E

SUN

SET

DR

HEN

DER

SON

RD

WHITEO

AKSBLVD

BLUE SPRUCE AVE

DEER

HURS

TDR

CREE

KPA

TH

AVE

CORP

ORA

TE D

R

GRAND BLVD

POSTMASTER

DR

MILLCROFT PK DR

GRAND RAVINE DR

HERITAGEW

AY

SAN

DLE

WO

OD

RDRIVE RSID

ED

R

GRA

NDO

AKT R


END

R

MEADOWHILL

RD

TOWNE BLVD

RIV E

RBANK W AY

FOU

RTH

LIN

E

CHIS

HOLM

ST

K W

INTE

RRD

NIC

HOLS

DR

MA

DDE N

BLVD

TURNB ERRY

RD

FALGARWOOD DR

BAYSHIR E

DR

PILGRIM

S WAY

SALE

M R

D

STRATT O

N

RD

DUNV EGAN AV E

PINEGROVE RD

SE ATON

DR

STATIO

NM

ASTER

LAN E

ELIZ

A CR

ESB RID

L E

WOOD

DUNCAN RD

CL

UBVIEW DR

WIC

K LO W

R D

SAND

WEL

L D

R

GA

BLE DR

WO

O DH A

V EN

PKDR

PROU

DFO

OT

TR

C AR OL

RD

WINSTON

RD

OA

K PK BLVD

TRAC

INA

DR

TRUM

AN A

VE

HIDD ENTR

BRISTOL CIRC

CRE EKSIDE

DR

CRE S

T MON

TDR

THEL

MA

ST

BING

LEY

CR ES

ARM

OUR CRES

LINDS

AYD

R

HILL

ST

JOHN LUCAS DR

FIELDCREST LANE

PHOE

BE C

RES

S SERVICE RD E

PEN ST

CLEA

R VIE

WDR

OLD

BRO

NTE

RD

RAYNE AVE

N SERVICE R D E

ZEN

ON

DR

S SHERIDAN WAY

HERI

TAGE RD

THE CANADIAN RD

LYNDHURS

TDR

APPL

EBY

L IN

E

QUEEN ELIZABETH WAY

HIG

HW

AY 403

HIGHWAY 407

CORP LYLA

AQUI

ASCN

PATR

SHOJ

ANNE

CHRS

ELIZ

OLPO

ANDR

JOHO

MARG

MICH

MOTH

POPE

BERN

JOAN

MATT

HLYF

DOMI

STJAJOSO

LUKE

VINC

MARY

V31

P35

L3

K3L9 L7

M9

K8

K9

N9

L6

M4

M1

L4

L16

L18

L19 M20

K24

M21K21

K20

I37

W23

O8

O9

P3

P6 Q4

R7

R10 S15

S17

S8

U14

V14

W11

W14

X14Y20

Y13

T18

U17

W24

W25

V19

U19

U21U20

U22U23

U25

T20

T25

T24P26P25

S21

S18

S19

S20

P10

P19

P20

P21

P27

P22

V23

I38 V24P30

K16

O20

O21

O18

M22

P23

T21

W22

V17Y21

K26

U24

N1 O7

Q10

U16T14

P28

W21

V20

P24

W26W20

¯

Tow

n of

Oak

ville


CURRENT BOUNDARIES

0 1 2 3 4KMs


City

of B

urlin

gton

Town of Milton

Town of Oakville

City

of M

issi

ssau

ga

Tow

n of

Oak

ville

N

SER V

ICE

RD

SOLIN

GATE

DR

BURL

OAK

DR

HARVESTER RD

TRAFALGAR

RD

TRAF

ALGA

R RD

B RO

NT E

RD

MAINWAY

RAND O LPHC

RES

APPL

EBY

LIN

E

REGI

ON

AL R

D 25

KERR

ST

CHAR

TWEL

L RD

DES JARDINES DR

ELMWO OD RD

SPRUCE AVE

SIXTEEN MILE DR

KAITING TR

NEW ST

W ST

GATW

ICK DR

PINEHURST

DRM

APLE

GRO

VE D

R

REBECCA ST

CORNWALL RD

N PK BLVD

LAKESHORE RD

SIXT

H L

INE

WIN

STO

N C

HURC

HIL

L BL

VD

WEM BLEY

RD

GLA

DES IDE

AVE

SOVEREIGN ST

RIVER GLEN BLVD

MO

RRIS

ON

RD

CRAIGL EITH RD

EL MRD

MERIC O URT RD

FAIRVIEW ST

LAKESHORE RD E

ROBE

RT B

ROW

N BL

VD

DRYDEN AVE

GARLAN D

C R ES

VICTORIA ST

MIKALDARD

N RIDGE TR

GROSV EN

OR

ST

REBECCA ST

LONGMOOR

DR

DUNDAS ST E

STEVENSONRD

FORS

YTH

EST

DAVIS RD

REYN

OLD

S ST

JENN

AVE

RIDGE DR

TAUN

TON

RD

HOP KINS

DR

WIL

LIS

DR

GOO

DRA

MD

R

OA

KHAV

END

R

MA PLE AVE

KINGSW

AYDR

GLENASHTON DR

BA RTO

S DR

OXF

ORD

AVE

KESTELL

BLVD

ONTARIO ST

WAL

BY D

R

BARO

NW

OO

DDR

SENECA DR

FOTH

ERG

ILL

BLVD

POPL

ARDRW

ATSO

N A

VE

BRIDGE RD

GLEN VALLEY RD

RIVER OAKS BLVDW

PARK GLEN

AV E

WARREN DR

WYA

NDOTTE DR

TENN

YSO

NDR

BO ND ST


STEE

PL

ECHASE DR

CONSTANCE DR

MCCRANEYST

E

BURNET ST

BLOO

MFI

ELD

DR

BELYEA ST

G ULL ED GE

TR

T HOMAS ALTON BLVD

MARINE DR

DIGBY

RD

BRIDLE

W O O D

TR

LAKESHORE RD W

WILLIAM ST

BEVA

N DR

GR ANBY

DR

ARRO WHEAD RD

SANDPIPER RD

H AW T H OR NE D R

LAMPM

AN

AV E

O LD ABB EYLA

NE

ARBOUR V IEW DR

KING ST

RIVER OAKS BLVD E

YOLANDADR

RO SEWOODLAN

E

HOLTON

HTS DR

CA PEAVE

SPRUCE ST

JULI

A AV

E

GA MBLE

RD

C H E V ERIE ST

CULHAM ST

RIDGE

LNDG

LEIGHLAND AVE

IN GL EDE

NE

DR

SHER

WO

OD

HTS DR

BURG

UND

Y DR

MISSISSAG

A ST

BENNETT RD

ANDO

VER

RD

DEANE AVE

MO

RDEN

RD

COSBURNCRES

THIR

DLI

NE

BUR TO

NRD

SHO

REAC

RES

RD

DUNEDIN RD

ERIN DALE

DR

A INTR EE

TERR

GRACE DR

TUCK

DR

SEAFARE DR

BENNING TON G T

VALLEYDR

HIXON ST

BERW

ICK

DR

OAK WALK DR

TANSLEY DR

DEER RU N A VE

GIBS

ON D

R

A LBIONAVE

WED

GEW

OO

D D

R

S ARAZEN DR

BIS HOPSG T

TAYWOOD DR

GLEN

OAK

DR

LAKEVIE W

DR

S TA

NFI

ELD

DR

MAP

LEH

URST

AVE

SABE

LST

REEVES RD

WES

TMI N

STER

DR

ROBINSON ST


NEYA

GAW

A BL

VDW

OO

DALE

AVE

RANDALL ST

STRATU

SD

R

JOHN ST

CLEAVER DR

ASHB

URY

RD

LINBROOK RD

POSTRI DGE

DR

FRONT ST


CHURCH ST

DOU

GLA

S AV

E

ROYAL WINDSOR DR

COLE CRES

SSERVICE RD W

SECO

ND S

T

EIG H

THL I

NE


PINEDALE AVE

MILLER RD

FIRST

ST

IROQUOIS SHORE RD

DUNDAS ST W

POST

RD

REEVESG T

N SER V ICE

RD

W

KHAL

SA G

T

STANBU RY RD

SPEERS RD

AR

GUS RD

ERWIN RD

NO 1 SIDE RD

G REENWO

OD

C RE

S

WESTMOUNT DR

CA R

EY

RD

ROS EM OUN

TCRES

BOROSRD

S A LCOM

E

D R

WATERBRI

DG EDR

POPL

AR D

R

P LYMOUTH DR

DON

E SS L

ED R

IRON

ST

ONE DR

CAUL DERDR

PINE AVE

UPPER MIDDLE RD E

GATEW

AY

MO

NT C

L AIR

DR

WYECROFT RD

JOSH

UASCREE

KDR

INTE

RNA T

I ON A

LB L

V D

KEN

T AV

E

WIL

SON

AVE

BUCK

INGH

AM R

D

HEN

DERS

ON

RD

VERDIST

S SERVICE RD

ELTO

NPK

RD

BURNHAMTHORPE RD W

DUNDAS ST

OA K

C

RES

PACI

FIC

RD

SAVOYCRES

TREM

AIN

E RD

CO VE NT RY RD

PROG

R ESS

CT

GLEN ABBE Y GT

BERYL RD

HWY 407

HWY 407

INDUST RY

ST

JEZERO

CRES

ADAIR

C R E S

BALS

AM

DR

BRIGHTON RD

PORTLAND DR

I NV

I C

TA DR

HOSP

ITAL G

T

MELVIN AVE

REDW

OOD

SQ

VENE

T IA D R

COLO

N IA L

CRES

NIN

TH L

INE

HARRIS ON

CT

HW

Y40

3

MCP HERSO

NRD

C ASTL EF

I

ELDCRES

PALETTAC

T

P A L LA

DIUM WAY

SUPERIOR CT

NO 2 SIDE RD

FOURTH LINE

BELL

SCH

OO

L LI

NE

NSH

ER

IDAN WAY

IT ABASH I WAY

BURNHAMTHORPE RD E

WAL

KER'

SLI

NE

PATH

FIN

DE

R DR

DORVAL DR

BRAYS

LANE

TRAILSIDE

DR

E ST

QU

EEN

MAR

Y DR

TAY

L OR CRE S

RIVE

RVIEWST

SUTT

ON

DR

NAUTICAL BLVD

VALLE YR IDGE

DR

MO

HAWK

R D

NAVY

ST

CROSS AVE

NOTT

ING

HIL

LG

T

W YNTENW

AY

DE VON RD

ALLA

N S

T

WIN

T ERB

OUR NEDR

FORD

DR

LEES

LAN

E

SUN

SET

DR

HEN

DER

SON

RD

WHITEO

AKSBLVD

BLUE SPRUCE AVE

DEER

HURS

TDR

CREE

KPA

TH

AVE

CORP

ORA

TE D

R

GRAND BLVD

POSTMASTER

DR

MILLCROFT PK DR

GRAND RAVINE DR

HERITAGEW

AY

SAN

DLE

WO

OD

RDRIVE RSID

ED

R

GRA

NDO

AKT R


END

R

MEADOWHILL

RD

TOWNE BLVD

RIV E

RBANK W AY

FOU

RTH

LIN

E

CHIS

HOLM

ST

K W

INTE

RRD

NIC

HOLS

DR

MA

DDE N

BLVD

TURNB ERRY

RD

FALGARWOOD DR

BAYSHIR E

DR

PILGRIM

S WAY

SALE

M R

D

STRATT O

N

RD

DUNV EGAN AV E

PINEGROVE RD

SE ATON

DR

STATIO

NM

ASTER

LAN E

ELIZ

A CR

ESB RID

L E

WOOD

DUNCAN RD

CL

UBVIEW DR

WIC

K LO W

R D

SAND

WEL

L D

R

GA

BLE DR

WO

O DH A

V EN

PKDR

PROU

DFO

OT

TR

C AR OL

RD

WINSTON

RD

OA

K PK BLVD

TRAC

INA

DR

TRUM

AN A

VE

HIDD ENTR

BRISTOL CIRC

CRE EKSIDE

DR

CRE S

T MON

TDR

THEL

MA

ST

BING

LEY

CR ES

ARM

OUR CRES

LINDS

AYD

R

HILL

ST

JOHN LUCAS DR

FIELDCREST LANE

PHOE

BE C

RES

S SERVICE RD E

PEN ST

CLEA

R VIE

WDR

OLD

BRO

NTE

RD

RAYNE AVE

N SERVICE R D E

ZEN

ON

DR

S SHERIDAN WAY

HERI

TAGE RD

THE CANADIAN RD

LYNDHURS

TDR

APPL

EBY

L IN

E

QUEEN ELIZABETH WAY

HIG

HW

AY 403

HIGHWAY 407

CORP LYLA

AQUI

ASCN

PATR

SHOJ

ANNE

CHRS

ELIZ

OLPO

ANDR

JOHO

MARG

MICH

MOTH

POPE

BERN

JOAN

MATT

HLYF

DOMI

STJAJOSO

LUKE

VINC

MARY

V31

P35

L3

K3L9 L7

M9

K8

K9

N9

L6

M4

M1

L4

L16

L18

L19 M20

K24

M21K21

K20

I37

W23

O8

O9

P3

P6 Q4

R7

R10 S15

S17

S8

U14

V14

W11

W14

X14Y20

Y13

T18

U17

W24

W25

V19

U19

U21U20

U22U23

U25

T20

T25

T24P26P25

S21

S18

S19

S20

P10

P19

P20

P21

P27

P22

V23

I38 V24P30

K16

O20

O21

O18

M22

P23

T21

W22

V17Y21

K26

U24

N1 O7

Q10

U16T14

P28

W21

V20

P24

W26W20

¯

Tow

n of

Oak

ville


CURRENT BOUNDARIES

0 1 2 3 4KMs


City

of B

urlin

gton

Town of Milton

Town of Oakville

City

of M

issi

ssau

ga

Tow

n of

Oak

ville

N

SER V

ICE

RD

SOLIN

GATE

DR

BURL

OAK

DR

HARVESTER RD

TRAFALGAR

RD

TRAF

ALGA

R RD

B RO

NT E

RD

MAINWAY

RAND O LPHC

RES

APPL

EBY

LIN

E

REGI

ON

AL R

D 25

KERR

ST

CHAR

TWEL

L RD

DES JARDINES DR

ELMWO OD RD

SPRUCE AVE

SIXTEEN MILE DR

KAITING TR

NEW ST

W ST

GATW

ICK DR

PINEHURST

DRM

APLE

GRO

VE D

R

REBECCA ST

CORNWALL RD

N PK BLVD

LAKESHORE RD

SIXT

H L

INE

WIN

STO

N C

HURC

HIL

L BL

VD

WEM BLEY

RD

GLA

DES IDE

AVE

SOVEREIGN ST

RIVER GLEN BLVD

MO

RRIS

ON

RD

CRAIGL EITH RD

EL MRD

MERIC O URT RD

FAIRVIEW ST

LAKESHORE RD E

ROBE

RT B

ROW

N BL

VD

DRYDEN AVE

GARLAN D

C R ES

VICTORIA ST

MIKALDARD

N RIDGE TR

GROSV EN

OR

ST

REBECCA ST

LONGMOOR

DR

DUNDAS ST E

STEVENSONRD

FORS

YTH

EST

DAVIS RD

REYN

OLD

S ST

JENN

AVE

RIDGE DR

TAUN

TON

RD

HOP KINS

DR

WIL

LIS

DR

GOO

DRA

MD

R

OA

KHAV

END

R

MA PLE AVE

KINGSW

AYDR

GLENASHTON DR

BA RTO

S DR

OXF

ORD

AVE

KESTELL

BLVD

ONTARIO ST

WAL

BY D

R

BARO

NW

OO

DDR

SENECA DR

FOTH

ERG

ILL

BLVD

POPL

ARDRW

ATSO

N A

VE

BRIDGE RD

GLEN VALLEY RD

RIVER OAKS BLVDW

PARK GLEN

AV E

WARREN DR

WYA

NDOTTE DR

TENN

YSO

NDR

BO ND ST


STEE

PL

ECHASE DR

CONSTANCE DR

MCCRANEYST

E

BURNET ST

BLOO

MFI

ELD

DR

BELYEA ST

G ULL ED GE

TR

T HOMAS ALTON BLVD

MARINE DR

DIGBY

RD

BRIDLE

W O O D

TR

LAKESHORE RD W

WILLIAM ST

BEVA

N DR

GR ANBY

DR

ARRO WHEAD RD

SANDPIPER RD

H AW T H OR NE D R

LAMPM

AN

AV E

O LD ABB EYLA

NE

ARBOUR V IEW DR

KING ST

RIVER OAKS BLVD E

YOLANDADR

RO SEWOODLAN

E

HOLTON

HTS DR

CA PEAVE

SPRUCE ST

JULI

A AV

E

GA MBLE

RD

C H E V ERIE ST

CULHAM ST

RIDGE

LNDG

LEIGHLAND AVE

IN GL EDE

NE

DR

SHER

WO

OD

HTS DR

BURG

UND

Y DR

MISSISSAG

A ST

BENNETT RD

ANDO

VER

RD

DEANE AVE

MO

RDEN

RD

COSBURNCRES

THIR

DLI

NE

BUR TO

NRD

SHO

REAC

RES

RD

DUNEDIN RD

ERIN DALE

DR

A INTR EE

TERR

GRACE DR

TUCK

DR

SEAFARE DR

BENNING TON G T

VALLEYDR

HIXON ST

BERW

ICK

DR

OAK WALK DR

TANSLEY DR

DEER RU N A VE

GIBS

ON D

R

A LBIONAVE

WED

GEW

OO

D D

R

S ARAZEN DR

BIS HOPSG T

TAYWOOD DR

GLEN

OAK

DR

LAKEVIE W

DR

S TA

NFI

ELD

DR

MAP

LEH

URST

AVE

SABE

LST

REEVES RD

WES

TMI N

STER

DR

ROBINSON ST


NEYA

GAW

A BL

VDW

OO

DALE

AVE

RANDALL ST

STRATU

SD

R

JOHN ST

CLEAVER DR

ASHB

URY

RD

LINBROOK RD

POSTRI DGE

DR

FRONT ST


CHURCH ST

DOU

GLA

S AV

E

ROYAL WINDSOR DR

COLE CRES

SSERVICE RD W

SECO

ND S

T

EIG H

THL I

NE


PINEDALE AVE

MILLER RD

FIRST

ST

IROQUOIS SHORE RD

DUNDAS ST W

POST

RD

REEVESG T

N SER V ICE

RD

W

KHAL

SA G

T

STANBU RY RD

SPEERS RD

AR

GUS RD

ERWIN RD

NO 1 SIDE RD

G REENWO

OD

C RE

S

WESTMOUNT DR

CA R

EY

RD

ROS EM OUN

TCRES

BOROSRD

S A LCOM

E

D R

WATERBRI

DG EDR

POPL

AR D

R

P LYMOUTH DR

DON

E SS L

ED R

IRON

ST

ONE DR

CAUL DERDR

PINE AVE

UPPER MIDDLE RD E

GATEW

AY

MO

NT C

L AIR

DR

WYECROFT RD

JOSH

UASCREE

KDR

INTE

RNA T

I ON A

LB L

V D

KEN

T AV

E

WIL

SON

AVE

BUCK

INGH

AM R

D

HEN

DERS

ON

RD

VERDIST

S SERVICE RD

ELTO

NPK

RD

BURNHAMTHORPE RD W

DUNDAS ST

OA K

C

RES

PACI

FIC

RD

SAVOYCRES

TREM

AIN

E RD

CO VE NT RY RD

PROG

R ESS

CT

GLEN ABBE Y GT

BERYL RD

HWY 407

HWY 407

INDUST RY

ST

JEZERO

CRES

ADAIR

C R E S

BALS

AM

DR

BRIGHTON RD

PORTLAND DR

I NV

I C

TA DR

HOSP

ITAL G

T

MELVIN AVE

REDW

OOD

SQ

VENE

T IA D R

COLO

N IA L

CRES

NIN

TH L

INE

HARRIS ON

CT

HW

Y40

3

MCP HERSO

NRD

C ASTL EF

I

ELDCRES

PALETTAC

T

P A L LA

DIUM WAY

SUPERIOR CT

NO 2 SIDE RD

FOURTH LINE

BELL

SCH

OO

L LI

NE

NSH

ER

IDAN WAY

IT ABASH I WAY

BURNHAMTHORPE RD E

WAL

KER'

SLI

NE

PATH

FIN

DE

R DR

DORVAL DR

BRAYS

LANE

TRAILSIDE

DR

E ST

QU

EEN

MAR

Y DR

TAY

L OR CRE S

RIVE

RVIEWST

SUTT

ON

DR

NAUTICAL BLVD

VALLE YR IDGE

DR

MO

HAWK

R D

NAVY

ST

CROSS AVE

NOTT

ING

HIL

LG

T

W YNTENW

AY

DE VON RD

ALLA

N S

T

WIN

T ERB

OUR NEDR

FORD

DR

LEES

LAN

E

SUN

SET

DR

HEN

DER

SON

RD

WHITEO

AKSBLVD

BLUE SPRUCE AVE

DEER

HURS

TDR

CREE

KPA

TH

AVE

CORP

ORA

TE D

R

GRAND BLVD

POSTMASTER

DR

MILLCROFT PK DR

GRAND RAVINE DR

HERITAGEW

AY

SAN

DLE

WO

OD

RDRIVE RSID

ED

R

GRA

NDO

AKT R


END

R

MEADOWHILL

RD

TOWNE BLVD

RIV E

RBANK W AY

FOU

RTH

LIN

E

CHIS

HOLM

ST

K W

INTE

RRD

NIC

HOLS

DR

MA

DDE N

BLVD

TURNB ERRY

RD

FALGARWOOD DR

BAYSHIR E

DR

PILGRIM

S WAY

SALE

M R

D

STRATT O

N

RD

DUNV EGAN AV E

PINEGROVE RD

SE ATON

DR

STATIO

NM

ASTER

LAN E

ELIZ

A CR

ESB RID

L E

WOOD

DUNCAN RD

CL

UBVIEW DR

WIC

K LO W

R D

SAND

WEL

L D

R

GA

BLE DR

WO

O DH A

V EN

PKDR

PROU

DFO

OT

TR

C AR OL

RD

WINSTON

RD

OA

K PK BLVD

TRAC

INA

DR

TRUM

AN A

VE

HIDD ENTR

BRISTOL CIRC

CRE EKSIDE

DR

CRE S

T MON

TDR

THEL

MA

ST

BING

LEY

CR ES

ARM

OUR CRES

LINDS

AYD

R

HILL

ST

JOHN LUCAS DR

FIELDCREST LANE

PHOE

BE C

RES

S SERVICE RD E

PEN ST

CLEA

R VIE

WDR

OLD

BRO

NTE

RD

RAYNE AVE

N SERVICE R D E

ZEN

ON

DR

S SHERIDAN WAY

HERI

TAGE RD

THE CANADIAN RD

LYNDHURS

TDR

APPL

EBY

L IN

E

QUEEN ELIZABETH WAY

HIG

HW

AY 403

HIGHWAY 407

CORP LYLA

AQUI

ASCN

PATR

SHOJ

ANNE

CHRS

ELIZ

OLPO

ANDR

JOHO

MARG

MICH

MOTH

POPE

BERN

JOAN

MATT

HLYF

DOMI

STJAJOSO

LUKE

VINC

MARY

V31

P35

L3

K3L9 L7

M9

K8

K9

N9

L6

M4

M1

L4

L16

L18

L19 M20

K24

M21K21

K20

I37

W23

O8

O9

P3

P6 Q4

R7

R10 S15

S17

S8

U14

V14

W11

W14

X14Y20

Y13

T18

U17

W24

W25

V19

U19

U21U20

U22U23

U25

T20

T25

T24P26P25

S21

S18

S19

S20

P10

P19

P20

P21

P27

P22

V23

I38 V24P30

K16

O20

O21

O18

M22

P23

T21

W22

V17Y21

K26

U24

N1 O7

Q10

U16T14

P28

W21

V20

P24

W26W20

¯

Tow

n of

Oak

ville


CURRENT BOUNDARIES

0 1 2 3 4KMs


City

of B

urlin

gton

Town of Milton

Town of Oakville

City

of M

issi

ssau

ga

Tow

n of

Oak

ville

N

SER V

ICE

RD

SOLIN

GATE

DR

BURL

OAK

DR

HARVESTER RD

TRAFALGAR

RD

TRAF

ALGA

R RD

B RO

NT E

RD

MAINWAY

RAND O LPHC

RES

APPL

EBY

LIN

E

REGI

ON

AL R

D 25

KERR

ST

CHAR

TWEL

L RD

DES JARDINES DR

ELMWO OD RD

SPRUCE AVE

SIXTEEN MILE DR

KAITING TR

NEW ST

W ST

GATW

ICK DR

PINEHURST

DRM

APLE

GRO

VE D

R

REBECCA ST

CORNWALL RD

N PK BLVD

LAKESHORE RD

SIXT

H L

INE

WIN

STO

N C

HURC

HIL

L BL

VD

WEM BLEY

RD

GLA

DES IDE

AVE

SOVEREIGN ST

RIVER GLEN BLVD

MO

RRIS

ON

RD

CRAIGL EITH RD

EL MRD

MERIC O URT RD

FAIRVIEW ST

LAKESHORE RD E

ROBE

RT B

ROW

N BL

VD

DRYDEN AVE

GARLAN D

C R ES

VICTORIA ST

MIKALDARD

N RIDGE TR

GROSV EN

OR

ST

REBECCA ST

LONGMOOR

DR

DUNDAS ST E

STEVENSONRD

FORS

YTH

EST

DAVIS RD

REYN

OLD

S ST

JENN

AVE

RIDGE DR

TAUN

TON

RD

HOP KINS

DR

WIL

LIS

DR

GOO

DRA

MD

R

OA

KHAV

END

R

MA PLE AVE

KINGSW

AYDR

GLENASHTON DR

BA RTO

S DR

OXF

ORD

AVE

KESTELL

BLVD

ONTARIO ST

WAL

BY D

R

BARO

NW

OO

DDR

SENECA DR

FOTH

ERG

ILL

BLVD

POPL

ARDRW

ATSO

N A

VE

BRIDGE RD

GLEN VALLEY RD

RIVER OAKS BLVDW

PARK GLEN

AV E

WARREN DR

WYA

NDOTTE DR

TENN

YSO

NDR

BO ND ST


STEE

PL

ECHASE DR

CONSTANCE DR

MCCRANEYST

E

BURNET ST

BLOO

MFI

ELD

DR

BELYEA ST

G ULL ED GE

TR

T HOMAS ALTON BLVD

MARINE DR

DIGBY

RD

BRIDLE

W O O D

TR

LAKESHORE RD W

WILLIAM ST

BEVA

N DR

GR ANBY

DR

ARRO WHEAD RD

SANDPIPER RD

H AW T H OR NE D R

LAMPM

AN

AV E

O LD ABB EYLA

NE

ARBOUR V IEW DR

KING ST

RIVER OAKS BLVD E

YOLANDADR

RO SEWOODLAN

E

HOLTON

HTS DR

CA PEAVE

SPRUCE ST

JULI

A AV

E

GA MBLE

RD

C H E V ERIE ST

CULHAM ST

RIDGE

LNDG

LEIGHLAND AVE

IN GL EDE

NE

DR

SHER

WO

OD

HTS DR

BURG

UND

Y DR

MISSISSAG

A ST

BENNETT RD

ANDO

VER

RD

DEANE AVE

MO

RDEN

RD

COSBURNCRES

THIR

DLI

NE

BUR TO

NRD

SHO

REAC

RES

RD

DUNEDIN RD

ERIN DALE

DR

A INTR EE

TERR

GRACE DR

TUCK

DR

SEAFARE DR

BENNING TON G T

VALLEYDR

HIXON ST

BERW

ICK

DR

OAK WALK DR

TANSLEY DR

DEER RU N A VE

GIBS

ON D

R

A LBIONAVE

WED

GEW

OO

D D

R

S ARAZEN DR

BIS HOPSG T

TAYWOOD DR

GLEN

OAK

DR

LAKEVIE W

DR

S TA

NFI

ELD

DR

MAP

LEH

URST

AVE

SABE

LST

REEVES RD

WES

TMI N

STER

DR

ROBINSON ST


NEYA

GAW

A BL

VDW

OO

DALE

AVE

RANDALL ST

STRATU

SD

R

JOHN ST

CLEAVER DR

ASHB

URY

RD

LINBROOK RD

POSTRI DGE

DR

FRONT ST


CHURCH ST

DOU

GLA

S AV

E

ROYAL WINDSOR DR

COLE CRES

SSERVICE RD W

SECO

ND S

T

EIG H

THL I

NE


PINEDALE AVE

MILLER RD

FIRST

ST

IROQUOIS SHORE RD

DUNDAS ST W

POST

RD

REEVESG T

N SER V ICE

RD

W

KHAL

SA G

T

STANBU RY RD

SPEERS RD

AR

GUS RD

ERWIN RD

NO 1 SIDE RD

G REENWO

OD

C RE

S

WESTMOUNT DR

CA R

EY

RD

ROS EM OUN

TCRES

BOROSRD

S A LCOM

E

D R

WATERBRI

DG EDR

POPL

AR D

R

P LYMOUTH DR

DON

E SS L

ED R

IRON

ST

ONE DR

CAUL DERDR

PINE AVE

UPPER MIDDLE RD E

GATEW

AY

MO

NT C

L AIR

DR

WYECROFT RD

JOSH

UASCREE

KDR

INTE

RNA T

I ON A

LB L

V D

KEN

T AV

E

WIL

SON

AVE

BUCK

INGH

AM R

D

HEN

DERS

ON

RD

VERDIST

S SERVICE RD

ELTO

NPK

RD

BURNHAMTHORPE RD W

DUNDAS ST

OA K

C

RES

PACI

FIC

RD

SAVOYCRES

TREM

AIN

E RD

CO VE NT RY RD

PROG

R ESS

CT

GLEN ABBE Y GT

BERYL RD

HWY 407

HWY 407

INDUST RY

ST

JEZERO

CRESADAIR

C R E S

BALS

AM

DR

BRIGHTON RD

PORTLAND DR

I NV

I C

TA DR

HOSP

ITAL G

T

MELVIN AVE

REDW

OOD

SQ

VENE

T IA D R

COLO

N IA L

CRES

NIN

TH L

INE

HARRIS ON

CT

HW

Y40

3

MCP HERSO

NRD

C ASTL EF

I

ELDCRES

PALETTAC

T

P A L LA

DIUM WAY

SUPERIOR CT

NO 2 SIDE RD

FOURTH LINE

BELL

SCH

OO

L LI

NE

NSH

ER

IDAN WAY

IT ABASH I WAY

BURNHAMTHORPE RD E

WAL

KER'

SLI

NE

PATH

FIN

DE

R DR

DORVAL DR

BRAYS

LANE

TRAILSIDE

DR

E ST

QU

EEN

MAR

Y DR

TAY

L OR CRE S

RIVE

RVIEWST

SUTT

ON

DR

NAUTICAL BLVD

VALLE YR IDGE

DR

MO

HAWK

R D

NAVY

ST

CROSS AVE

NOTT

ING

HIL

LG

T

W YNTENW

AY

DE VON RD

ALLA

N S

T

WIN

T ERB

OUR NEDR

FORD

DR

LEES

LAN

E

SUN

SET

DR

HEN

DER

SON

RD

WHITEO

AKSBLVD

BLUE SPRUCE AVE

DEER

HURS

TDR

CREE

KPA

TH

AVE

CORP

ORA

TE D

R

GRAND BLVD

POSTMASTER

DR

MILLCROFT PK DR

GRAND RAVINE DR

HERITAGEW

AY

SAN

DLE

WO

OD

RDRIVE RSID

ED

R

GRA

NDO

AKT R


END

R

MEADOWHILL

RD

TOWNE BLVD

RIV E

RBANK W AY

FOU

RTH

LIN

E

CHIS

HOLM

ST

K W

INTE

RRD

NIC

HOLS

DR

MA

DDE N

BLVD

TURNB ERRY

RD

FALGARWOOD DR

BAYSHIR E

DR

PILGRIM

S WAY

SALE

M R

D

STRATT O

N

RD

DUNV EGAN AV E

PINEGROVE RD

SE ATON

DR

STATIO

NM

ASTER

LAN E

ELIZ

A CR

ESB RID

L E

WOOD

DUNCAN RD

CL

UBVIEW DR

WIC

K LO W

R D

SAND

WEL

L D

R

GA

BLE DR

WO

O DH A

V EN

PKDR

PROU

DFO

OT

TR

C AR OL

RD

WINSTON

RD

OA

K PK BLVD

TRAC

INA

DR

TRUM

AN A

VE

HIDD ENTR

BRISTOL CIRC

CRE EKSIDE

DR

CRE S

T MON

TDR

THEL

MA

ST

BING

LEY

CR ES

ARM

OUR CRES

LINDS

AYD

R

HILL

ST

JOHN LUCAS DR

FIELDCREST LANE

PHOE

BE C

RES

S SERVICE RD E

PEN ST

CLEA

R VIE

WDR

OLD

BRO

NTE

RD

RAYNE AVE

N SERVICE R D E

ZEN

ON

DR

S SHERIDAN WAY

HERI

TAGE RD

THE CANADIAN RD

LYNDHURS

TDR

APPL

EBY

L IN

E

QUEEN ELIZABETH WAY

HIG

HW

AY 403

HIGHWAY 407

CORP LYLA

AQUI

ASCN

PATR

SHOJ

ANNE

CHRS

ELIZ

OLPO

ANDR

JOHO

MARG

MICH

MOTH

POPE

BERN

JOAN

MATT

HLYF

DOMI

STJAJOSO

LUKE

VINC

MARY

V31

P35

L3

K3L9 L7

M9

K8

K9

N9

L6

M4

M1

L4

L16

L18

L19 M20

K24

M21K21

K20

I37

W23

O8

O9

P3

P6 Q4

R7

R10 S15

S17

S8

U14

V14

W11

W14

X14Y20

Y13

T18

U17

W24

W25

V19

U19

U21U20

U22U23

U25

T20

T25

T24P26P25

S21

S18

S19

S20

P10

P19

P20

P21

P27

P22

V23

I38 V24P30

K16

O20

O21

O18

M22

P23

T21

W22

V17Y21

K26

U24

N1 O7

Q10

U16T14

P28

W21

V20

P24

W26W20

¯

Tow

n of

Oak

ville


CURRENT BOUNDARIES

0 1 2 3 4KMs


City

of B

urlin

gton

Town of Milton

Town of Oakville

City

of M

issi

ssau

ga

Tow

n of

Oak

ville

ACTIONS:• RedirectV23(NorthOakville

SecondaryPlan)fromSt.ThomasAquinasCSStowardsHolyTrinityCSS

• RedirectSt.MaryCES(PatchesP19,P27,P30,O18,O20,O21,&V24-V23isexcluded)fromSt.ThomasAquinasCSStowardSt.IgnatiusofLoyolaCSS

Page 23296

OPTION #1A4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19




HLYT

LYLA

AQUI

HLY

TLY

LAAQ

UI

Page 24

Option 1 ENROLMENT

297


1182 1233 1278

1327 1345 1327 1354 1360 1368 1406 1441 1468 1492 1490 1485 1483

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

1800

ENR

OLM

ENT

(HC

)



1240 1251 1223 1183 1174 1153 1132 1124 1149 1156 1237

1311 1353 1392 1406 1419

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

1800

ENR

OLM

ENT

(HC

)

Holy Trinity CSS - Enrolment Trend Option #1A ACTIONS:

• Redirect V23 (North Oakville Secondary Plan) from St. Thomas Aquinas CSS towards Holy Trinity CSS


Holy Trinity Catholic Secondary School - Enrolment TrendOption1

Page 25

Option 1 ENROLMENT

298



• Redirect St. Mary CES (Patches P19, P27, P30, O18, O20, O21, & V24 - V23 is excluded) from St. Thomas Aquinas CSS toward St. Ignatius of Loyola CSS

St. Ignatius of Loyola Catholic Secondary School - Enrolment TrendOption1


1182 1233 1278

1327 1345 1327 1354 1360 1368 1406 1441 1468 1492 1490 1485 1483

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

1800

ENR

OLM

ENT

(HC

)



1240 1251 1223 1183 1174 1153 1132 1124 1149 1156 1237

1311 1353 1392 1406 1419

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

1800

ENR

OLM

ENT

(HC

)


Page 26

Option 1 ENROLMENT

299


1049 1118 1161

1224 1181 1186 1186 1194 1239 1315

1372 1391 1395 1353 1317 1286

0

250

500

750

1000

1250

1500

1750

ENR

OLM

ENT

(HC

)

St. Thomas of Aquinas CSS - Enrolment Trend Option #1A

ACTIONS:• Redirect V23 (North

Oakville Secondary Plan) from St. Thomas Aquinas CSS towards Holy Trinity CSS


St. Thomas Aquinas Catholic Secondary School - Enrolment TrendOption1

Page 27

Option 1 ENROLMENT

300

OPTION 2

Page 28301

N

SER V

ICE

RD

SOLIN

GATE

DR

HAM

P TO

NH

EATH

RD

BURL

OAK

DR

HARVESTER RD

TRAFAL GAR

RD

TRAF

ALGA

R RD

B RO

NT E

RD

MAINWAY

RAND O LPHC

RES

APPL

EBY

LIN

E

REG

I ON A

LRD

25

KERR

ST

CHAR

TWEL

L RD

DES JARDINES DR

ELMWO OD RD

SPRUCE AVE

SIXTEEN MILE DR

KAITING TR

NEW ST

W ST

GATWICK DR

PINEHURST

DRM

APLE

GRO

VE D

R

REBECCA ST

CORNWALL RD

N PK BLVD

LAKESHORE RD

SIXT

HL I

NE

WIN

STO

N C

HURC

HIL

L BL

VD

WEM BLEY

RD

GLA

DESIDEAVE

SOVEREIGN ST


ELM

R D

FAIRVIEW ST

LAKESHORE RD E

ROBE

RT B

ROW

N BL

VD

GARLAN D

C R ES

VICTORIA ST

MIKALDARD

N RIDGE TR

REBECCA ST

SH ERIDAN GRD NDR

LONGMOOR

DR

DUNDAS ST E

STEVENSONRD

FORS

YTH

EST

DAVIS RD

REYN

OLD

S ST

JENN

AVE

RIDGE DR

TAUN

TON

RD

HOP KINS

DR

WIL

LIS

DR

GOO

DRA

MD

R

OA

KHAV

END

R

MA PLE AVE

KINGSW

AYDR

GLENA SHTON DR

BA RTO

S DR

OXF

ORD

AVE

KESTELL

BLVD

ONTARIO ST

WAL

BY D

R

BROMLEY RD

BARO

NW

OOD

DR

SENECA DR

FOTH

ERG

ILL

BLVD

POPL

ARDR

WAT

SON

AVE

BRIDGE RD

GLEN VALLEY RD

PARK GLEN

AV E

WARREN DR

WYA

NDOTTE DR

TENN

YSO

NDR

BO ND ST


STEE

PL

ECHASE DR

CONSTANCE DR

MCCRANEYST

E

BURNET ST

BLOO

MFI

ELD

DR

BELYEA ST

G ULL ED GE

TR

T HOMAS ALTON BLVD

MARINE DR

DIGBY

RD

BRIDLE

W O O D

TR

LAKESHORE RD W

WILLIAM ST

BEVA

N DR

GR ANBY

DR

ARRO WHEAD RD

SANDPIPER RD

H AW T H OR NE D R

LAMPM

AN

AV E

O LD ABB EYLA

NE

ARBOUR V IEW DR

KING ST

RIVER OAKS BLVD E

YOLANDADR

HOLTON

HTS DR

CA PEAVE

SPRUCE ST

JULI

A AV

E

GA MBLE

RD

C H E V ERIE ST

CULHAM ST

RIDGE

LNDG

LEIGHLAND AVE

IN GL EDE

NE

DR

WINSTON RD

SHER

WO

OD

HTS DR

BURG

UND

Y DR

MISSISSAG

A ST

BENNETT RD

ANDO

VER

RD

DEANE AVE

MO

RDEN

RD

COSBURNCRES

THIR

D L

INE

BUR TO

NRD

SHO

REAC

RES

RD

DUNEDIN RD

GRACE DR

TUCK

DR

SEAFARE DR

BENNING TON GT

VALLEYDR

HIXON ST

BERW

ICK

DR

OAK WALK DR

TANSLEY DR

DEER RU N A VE

GIBS

ON D

R

A LBIONAVE

WED

GEW

OO

D D

R

S ARAZEN DR

BIS HOPSG T

TAYWOOD DR

GLEN

OAK

DR

LAKEVIE W

DR

S TAN

FIE L

DDR

MAP

LEH

URST

AVE

SABE

LST

REEVES RD

WES

TMI N

STER

DR

ROBINSON ST


NEYA

GAW

A BL

VDW

OO

DALE

AVE

RANDALL ST

STRATU

SD R

JOHN ST

CLEAVER DR

ASHB

URY

RD

LINBROOK RD

POSTRI DGE

DR

FRONT ST


CHURCH ST

DOU

GLA

S AV

E

ROYAL WINDSOR DR

COLE CRES

SSERVICE RD W

SECO

ND S

T

EIG

HTH

LIN

E


PINEDALE AVE

MILLER RD

FIRST

ST

IROQUOIS SHORE RD


POST

RD

REEVESG T

N SERVICE RD W

KHAL

SA G

T

STANBU RY RD

SPEERS RD

AR

GUS RD

ERWIN RD

NO 1 SIDE RD

G REENWO

OD

C RE

S

WESTMOUNT DR

CA R

EY

RD

ROS EM OUN

TCRES

BOROSRD

S A LCOM

E

D R

WATERBRI

DG EDR

POPL

AR D

R

PL YMOUTH DR

DON

E SS L

ED R

IRON

ST

ONE DR

CAUL DERDR

PINE AVE

UPPER MIDDLE RD E

GATEW

AY

MO

NT C

L AIR

DR

WYECROFT RD

JOSH

UASCREE K

DR

INTE

RNA T

I ON A

LB L

V D

KEN

T AV

E

WIL

SON

AVE

BUCK

INGH

AM R

D

HEN

DERS

ON

RD

VERDIST

ELTO

NPK

RD

BURNHAMTHORPE RD W

DUNDAS ST

OA K

C

RES

PACI

FIC

RD

SAVOYCRES

TREM

AIN

E RD

CO VE NT RY RD

PROG

R ESS

CT

GLEN ABBE Y GT

BERYL RD

HWY 407

HWY 407

INDUST RY

ST

JEZERO

CRES

ADAIR

C R E S

BALS

AM

DR

C AST

LE

CRES

BRIGHTON RD

PORTLAND DR

I NV

I C

TA DR

HOSP

ITAL G

T

CEN

TURY

DR

MELVIN AVE

SYSCON

R D

REDW

OOD

SQ

VENE

T IA D R

COLO

N IA L

CRES

NIN

TH L

INE

HARRIS ON

CT

HWY

403

MCP HERSO

NRD

C ASTL EF

I

ELDCRES

PALETTACT

PALLADIUM WAY

SUPERIOR CT

NO 2 SIDE RD

FOURTH LINE

BELL

SCH

OO

L LI

NE

NSH

ER

IDAN WAY

IT ABASH I WAY

BURNHAMTHORPE RD E

WAL

KER'

SLI

NE

PATH

F IND

ER DR

DORVALDR

BRAYS

LANE

TRAILSIDE

DR

E ST

QU

EEN

MAR

Y DR

TAY

L OR CRE S

RIVE

RVIEWST

SUTTO

ND

R

NAUTICAL BLVD

VALLE YR IDG

ED

R

MO

HAWK

R D

NAVY

ST

CROSS AVE

NOTT

ING

HIL

LG

T

W YNTENW

AY

DEVON RD

ALLA

N S

T

WIN

T ERB

OUR NEDR

FORD

DR

LEES

LAN

E

SUN

SET

DR

HEN

DER

SON

RD

WHITEO

AKSBLVD

B LUE SPRUCE AVE

DEER

HURS

TDR

CREE

KPA

TH

AVE

CORP

ORA

TE D

R

GRAND

BLVD

POSTMASTER

DR

MILLCROFT PK DR

GRAND RAVINE DR

HERITAGEW

AY

SAN

DLE

WO

OD

RDRIVE RSID

ED

R

GRAN

DO

AKTR

FALLIN G GRE

END

R

MEADOWHILL

RD

TOWNE BLVD

RIV E

RBANK W AY

FOU

RTH

LIN

E

CHIS

HOLM

ST

K W

INTE

RRD

NIC

HOLS

DR

MA

DDE N

BLVD

TURNB ERRY

RD

FALGARWOOD DR

BAYSHIR E

DR

PILGRIM

S WAY

SALE

M R

D

DUNV EGAN AV E

PINEGROVE RD

SE ATON

DR

STATIO

NM

ASTER

LAN E

ELIZ

A CR

ESB RID

L E

WOOD

DUNCAN RD

CL

UBVIEW DR

WIC

K LO W

R D

SAND

WEL

L D

R

GA

BLE DR

WO

O DH A

V EN

PKDR

PROUDFOO

TTR

C AR OL

RD

WINSTON

RD

TRAC

INA

DR

TRUM

AN A

VE

HIDD ENTR

BRISTOL CIRC

CRE EKSIDEDR

C RE S

T MON

TDR

THEL

MA

ST

BING

LEY

CR ES

ARM

OUR CRES

LINDS

AYD

R

HILL

ST

JOHN LUCAS DR

FIELDCREST LANE

PHOE

BE C

RES

S SERVICE RD E

PEN ST

CLEA

R VIE

WDR

OLD

BRO

NTE

RD

S SERVICE RD

RAYNE AVE

N SERVICE RD E

ZEN

ON

DR

S SHERIDAN WAY

HERI

TAGE RD

THE CANADIAN RD

APPL

EBY

L IN

E

QUEEN ELIZ

ABETH W

AY

HIG

HW

AY 403

HIGHWAY 407

ASCN

PATR

SHOJ

ANNE

CHRS

ELIZ

OLPO ANDR

JOHO

MARG

MICH

MOTH

POPE

BERN

JOAN

MATT

HLYF

DOMI

STJAJOSO

LUKE

VINC

MARY

V31

P35

L3

K3L9

L7

M9

K8

K9N9

L6

M4

M1

L4

L16

L18

L19 M20

K24

M21

K21

K20

I37

W23

O8

O9

P3

P6 Q4

R7

R10 S15

S17

S8

U14

V14

W11

W14

X14

Y20

Y13

T18

U17

W24

W25

V19

U19

U21U20

U22

U25T20

T25

T24P26P25

S21

S18

S19

S20

P10

P19

P20

P21

P27

P22

V23I38

V24

P30

K16

O20

O21

O18

M22

P23

T21

W22

V17Y21

K26

U24

N1 O7

Q10

U16T14

P28

W21

V20

P24

W26

W20

CORP

HLYT

LYLA

AQUI

¯

Tow

n of

Oak

ville


OPTION #1

0 1 2 3 4KMs


City

of B

urlin

gton

Town of Milton

Town of Oakville

City

of M

issi

ssau

ga

Tow

n of

Oak

ville

N

SER V

ICE

RD

SOLIN

GATE

DR

BURL

OAK

DR

HARVESTER RD

TRAFALGAR

RD

TRAF

ALGA

R RD

B RO

NT E

RD

MAINWAY

RAND O LPHC

RES

APPL

EBY

LIN

E

REGI

ON

AL R

D 25

KERR

ST

CHAR

TWEL

L RD

DES JARDINES DR

ELMWO OD RD

SPRUCE AVE

SIXTEEN MILE DR

KAITING TR

NEW ST

W ST

GATW

ICK DR

PINEHURST

DRM

APLE

GRO

VE D

R

REBECCA ST

CORNWALL RD

N PK BLVD

LAKESHORE RD

SIXT

H L

INE

WIN

STO

N C

HURC

HIL

L BL

VD

WEM BLEY

RD

GLA

DES IDE

AVE

SOVEREIGN ST

RIVER GLEN BLVD

MO

RRIS

ON

RD

CRAIGL EITH RD

EL MRD

MERIC O URT RD

FAIRVIEW ST

LAKESHORE RD E

ROBE

RT B

ROW

N BL

VD

DRYDEN AVE

GARLAN D

C R ES

VICTORIA ST

MIKALDARD

N RIDGE TR

GROSV EN

OR

ST

REBECCA ST

LONGMOOR

DR

DUNDAS ST E

STEVENSONRD

FORS

YTH

EST

DAVIS RD

REYN

OLD

S ST

JENN

AVE

RIDGE DR

TAUN

TON

RD

HOP KINS

DR

WIL

LIS

DR

GOO

DRA

MD

R

OA

KHAV

END

R

MA PLE AVE

KINGSW

AYDR

GLENASHTON DR

BA RTO

S DR

OXF

ORD

AVE

KESTELL

BLVD

ONTARIO ST

WAL

BY D

R

BARO

NW

OO

DDR

SENECA DR

FOTH

ERG

ILL

BLVD

POPL

ARDRW

ATSO

N A

VE

BRIDGE RD

GLEN VALLEY RD

RIVER OAKS BLVDW

PARK GLEN

AV E

WARREN DR

WYA

NDOTTE DR

TENN

YSO

NDR

BO ND ST


STEE

PL

ECHASE DR

CONSTANCE DR

MCCRANEYST

E

BURNET ST

BLOO

MFI

ELD

DR

BELYEA ST

G ULL ED GE

TR

T HOMAS ALTON BLVD

MARINE DR

DIGBY

RD

BRIDLE

W O O D

TR

LAKESHORE RD W

WILLIAM ST

BEVA

N DR

GR ANBY

DR

ARRO WHEAD RD

SANDPIPER RD

H AW T H OR NE D R

LAMPM

AN

AV E

O LD ABB EYLA

NE

ARBOUR V IEW DR

KING ST

RIVER OAKS BLVD E

YOLANDADR

RO SEWOODLAN

E

HOLTON

HTS DR

CA PEAVE

SPRUCE ST

JULI

A AV

E

GA MBLE

RD

C H E V ERIE ST

CULHAM ST

RIDGE

LNDG

LEIGHLAND AVE

IN GL EDE

NE

DR

SHER

WO

OD

HTS DR

BURG

UND

Y DR

MISSISSAG

A ST

BENNETT RD

ANDO

VER

RD

DEANE AVE

MO

RDEN

RD

COSBURNCRES

THIR

DLI

NE

BUR TO

NRD

SHO

REAC

RES

RD

DUNEDIN RD

ERIN DALE

DR

A INTR EE

TERR

GRACE DR

TUCK

DR

SEAFARE DR

BENNING TON G T

VALLEYDR

HIXON ST

BERW

ICK

DR

OAK WALK DR

TANSLEY DR

DEER RU N A VE

GIBS

ON D

R

A LBIONAVE

WED

GEW

OO

D D

R

S ARAZEN DR

BIS HOPSG T

TAYWOOD DR

GLEN

OAK

DR

LAKEVIE W

DR

S TA

NFI

ELD

DR

MAP

LEH

URST

AVE

SABE

LST

REEVES RD

WES

TMI N

STER

DR

ROBINSON ST


NEYA

GAW

A BL

VDW

OO

DALE

AVE

RANDALL ST

STRATU

SD

R

JOHN ST

CLEAVER DR

ASHB

URY

RD

LINBROOK RD

POSTRI DGE

DR

FRONT ST


CHURCH ST

DOU

GLA

S AV

E

ROYAL WINDSOR DR

COLE CRES

SSERVICE RD W

SECO

ND S

T

EIG H

THL I

NE


PINEDALE AVE

MILLER RD

FIRST

ST

IROQUOIS SHORE RD

DUNDAS ST W

POST

RD

REEVESG T

N SER V ICE

RD

W

KHAL

SA G

T

STANBU RY RD

SPEERS RD

AR

GUS RD

ERWIN RD

NO 1 SIDE RD

G REENWO

OD

C RE

S

WESTMOUNT DR

CA R

EY

RD

ROS EM OUN

TCRES

BOROSRD

S A LCOM

E

D R

WATERBRI

DG EDR

POPL

AR D

R

P LYMOUTH DR

DON

E SS L

ED R

IRON

ST

ONE DR

CAUL DERDR

PINE AVE

UPPER MIDDLE RD E

GATEW

AY

MO

NT C

L AIR

DR

WYECROFT RD

JOSH

UASCREE

KDR

INTE

RNA T

I ON A

LB L

V D

KEN

T AV

E

WIL

SON

AVE

BUCK

INGH

AM R

D

HEN

DERS

ON

RD

VERDIST

S SERVICE RD

ELTO

NPK

RD

BURNHAMTHORPE RD W

DUNDAS ST

OA K

C

RES

PACI

FIC

RD

SAVOYCRES

TREM

AIN

E RD

CO VE NT RY RD

PROG

R ESS

CT

GLEN ABBE Y GT

BERYL RD

HWY 407

HWY 407

INDUST RY

ST

JEZERO

CRESADAIR

C R E S

BALS

AM

DR

BRIGHTON RD

PORTLAND DR

I NV

I C

TA DR

HOSP

ITAL G

T

MELVIN AVE

REDW

OOD

SQ

VENE

T IA D R

COLO

N IA L

CRES

NIN

TH L

INE

HARRIS ON

CT

HW

Y40

3

MCP HERSO

NRD

C ASTL EF

I

ELDCRES

PALETTAC

T

P A L LA

DIUM WAY

SUPERIOR CT

NO 2 SIDE RD

FOURTH LINE

BELL

SCH

OO

L LI

NE

NSH

ER

IDAN WAY

IT ABASH I WAY

BURNHAMTHORPE RD E

WAL

KER'

SLI

NE

PATH

FIN

DE

R DR

DORVAL DR

BRAYS

LANE

TRAILSIDE

DR

E ST

QU

EEN

MAR

Y DR

TAY

L OR CRE S

RIVE

RVIEWST

SUTT

ON

DR

NAUTICAL BLVD

VALLE YR IDGE

DR

MO

HAWK

R D

NAVY

ST

CROSS AVE

NOTT

ING

HIL

LG

T

W YNTENW

AY

DE VON RD

ALLA

N S

T

WIN

T ERB

OUR NEDR

FORD

DR

LEES

LAN

E

SUN

SET

DR

HEN

DER

SON

RD

WHITEO

AKSBLVD

BLUE SPRUCE AVE

DEER

HURS

TDR

CREE

KPA

TH

AVE

CORP

ORA

TE D

R

GRAND BLVD

POSTMASTER

DR

MILLCROFT PK DR

GRAND RAVINE DR

HERITAGEW

AY

SAN

DLE

WO

OD

RDRIVE RSID

ED

R

GRA

NDO

AKT R


END

R

MEADOWHILL

RD

TOWNE BLVD

RIV E

RBANK W AY

FOU

RTH

LIN

E

CHIS

HOLM

ST

K W

INTE

RRD

NIC

HOLS

DR

MA

DDE N

BLVD

TURNB ERRY

RD

FALGARWOOD DR

BAYSHIR E

DR

PILGRIM

S WAY

SALE

M R

D

STRATT O

N

RD

DUNV EGAN AV E

PINEGROVE RD

SE ATON

DR

STATIO

NM

ASTER

LAN E

ELIZ

A CR

ESB RID

L E

WOOD

DUNCAN RD

CL

UBVIEW DR

WIC

K LO W

R D

SAND

WEL

L D

R

GA

BLE DR

WO

O DH A

V EN

PKDR

PROU

DFO

OT

TR

C AR OL

RD

WINSTON

RD

OA

K PK BLVD

TRAC

INA

DR

TRUM

AN A

VE

HIDD ENTR

BRISTOL CIRC

CRE EKSIDE

DR

CRE S

T MON

TDR

THEL

MA

ST

BING

LEY

CR ES

ARM

OUR CRES

LINDS

AYD

R

HILL

ST

JOHN LUCAS DR

FIELDCREST LANE

PHOE

BE C

RES

S SERVICE RD E

PEN ST

CLEA

R VIE

WDR

OLD

BRO

NTE

RD

RAYNE AVE

N SERVICE R D E

ZEN

ON

DR

S SHERIDAN WAY

HERI

TAGE RD

THE CANADIAN RD

LYNDHURS

TDR

APPL

EBY

L IN

E

QUEEN ELIZABETH WAY

HIG

HW

AY 403

HIGHWAY 407

CORP LYLA

AQUI

ASCN

PATR

SHOJ

ANNE

CHRS

ELIZ

OLPO

ANDR

JOHO

MARG

MICH

MOTH

POPE

BERN

JOAN

MATT

HLYF

DOMI

STJAJOSO

LUKE

VINC

MARY

V31

P35

L3

K3L9 L7

M9

K8

K9

N9

L6

M4

M1

L4

L16

L18

L19 M20

K24

M21K21

K20

I37

W23

O8

O9

P3

P6 Q4

R7

R10 S15

S17

S8

U14

V14

W11

W14

X14Y20

Y13

T18

U17

W24

W25

V19

U19

U21U20

U22U23

U25

T20

T25

T24P26P25

S21

S18

S19

S20

P10

P19

P20

P21

P27

P22

V23

I38 V24P30

K16

O20

O21

O18

M22

P23

T21

W22

V17Y21

K26

U24

N1 O7

Q10

U16T14

P28

W21

V20

P24

W26W20

¯

Tow

n of

Oak

ville


CURRENT BOUNDARIES

0 1 2 3 4KMs


City

of B

urlin

gton

Town of Milton

Town of Oakville

City

of M

issi

ssau

ga

Tow

n of

Oak

ville

N

SER V

ICE

RD

SOLIN

GATE

DR

BURL

OAK

DR

HARVESTER RD

TRAFALGAR

RD

TRAF

ALGA

R RD

B RO

NT E

RD

MAINWAY

RAND O LPHC

RES

APPL

EBY

LIN

E

REGI

ON

AL R

D 25

KERR

ST

CHAR

TWEL

L RD

DES JARDINES DR

ELMWO OD RD

SPRUCE AVE

SIXTEEN MILE DR

KAITING TR

NEW ST

W ST

GATW

ICK DR

PINEHURST

DRM

APLE

GRO

VE D

R

REBECCA ST

CORNWALL RD

N PK BLVD

LAKESHORE RD

SIXT

H L

INE

WIN

STO

N C

HURC

HIL

L BL

VD

WEM BLEY

RD

GLA

DES IDE

AVE

SOVEREIGN ST

RIVER GLEN BLVD

MO

RRIS

ON

RD

CRAIGL EITH RD

EL MRD

MERIC O URT RD

FAIRVIEW ST

LAKESHORE RD E

ROBE

RT B

ROW

N BL

VD

DRYDEN AVE

GARLAN D

C R ES

VICTORIA ST

MIKALDARD

N RIDGE TR

GROSV EN

OR

ST

REBECCA ST

LONGMOOR

DR

DUNDAS ST E

STEVENSONRD

FORS

YTH

EST

DAVIS RD

REYN

OLD

S ST

JENN

AVE

RIDGE DR

TAUN

TON

RD

HOP KINS

DR

WIL

LIS

DR

GOO

DRA

MD

R

OA

KHAV

END

R

MA PLE AVE

KINGSW

AYDR

GLENASHTON DR

BA RTO

S DR

OXF

ORD

AVE

KESTELL

BLVD

ONTARIO ST

WAL

BY D

R

BARO

NW

OO

DDR

SENECA DR

FOTH

ERG

ILL

BLVD

POPL

ARDRW

ATSO

N A

VE

BRIDGE RD

GLEN VALLEY RD

RIVER OAKS BLVDW

PARK GLEN

AV E

WARREN DR

WYA

NDOTTE DR

TENN

YSO

NDR

BO ND ST


STEE

PL

ECHASE DR

CONSTANCE DR

MCCRANEYST

E

BURNET ST

BLOO

MFI

ELD

DR

BELYEA ST

G ULL ED GE

TR

T HOMAS ALTON BLVD

MARINE DR

DIGBY

RD

BRIDLE

W O O D

TR

LAKESHORE RD W

WILLIAM ST

BEVA

N DR

GR ANBY

DR

ARRO WHEAD RD

SANDPIPER RD

H AW T H OR NE D R

LAMPM

AN

AV E

O LD ABB EYLA

NE

ARBOUR V IEW DR

KING ST

RIVER OAKS BLVD E

YOLANDADR

RO SEWOODLAN

E

HOLTON

HTS DR

CA PEAVE

SPRUCE ST

JULI

A AV

E

GA MBLE

RD

C H E V ERIE ST

CULHAM ST

RIDGE

LNDG

LEIGHLAND AVE

IN GL EDE

NE

DR

SHER

WO

OD

HTS DR

BURG

UND

Y DR

MISSISSAG

A ST

BENNETT RD

ANDO

VER

RD

DEANE AVE

MO

RDEN

RD

COSBURNCRES

THIR

DLI

NE

BUR TO

NRD

SHO

REAC

RES

RD

DUNEDIN RD

ERIN DALE

DR

A INTR EE

TERR

GRACE DR

TUCK

DR

SEAFARE DR

BENNING TON G T

VALLEYDR

HIXON ST

BERW

ICK

DR

OAK WALK DR

TANSLEY DR

DEER RU N A VE

GIBS

ON D

R

A LBIONAVE

WED

GEW

OO

D D

R

S ARAZEN DR

BIS HOPSG T

TAYWOOD DR

GLEN

OAK

DR

LAKEVIE W

DR

S TA

NFI

ELD

DR

MAP

LEH

URST

AVE

SABE

LST

REEVES RD

WES

TMI N

STER

DR

ROBINSON ST


NEYA

GAW

A BL

VDW

OO

DALE

AVE

RANDALL ST

STRATU

SD

R

JOHN ST

CLEAVER DR

ASHB

URY

RD

LINBROOK RD

POSTRI DGE

DR

FRONT ST


CHURCH ST

DOU

GLA

S AV

E

ROYAL WINDSOR DR

COLE CRES

SSERVICE RD W

SECO

ND S

T

EIG H

THL I

NE


PINEDALE AVE

MILLER RD

FIRST

ST

IROQUOIS SHORE RD

DUNDAS ST WPO

ST R

D

REEVESG T

N SER V ICE

RD

W

KHAL

SA G

T

STANBU RY RD

SPEERS RD

AR

GUS RD

ERWIN RD

NO 1 SIDE RD

G REENWO

OD

C RE

S

WESTMOUNT DR

CA R

EYRD

ROS EM OUN

TCRES

BOROSRD

S A LCOM

E

D R

WATERBRI

DG EDR

POPL

AR D

R

P LYMOUTH DRDO

NE S

S LE

D R

IRON

ST

ONE DR

CAUL DERDR

PINE AVE

UPPER MIDDLE RD E

GATEW

AY

MO

NT C

L AIR

DR

WYECROFT RD

JOSH

UASCREE

KDR

INTE

RNA T

I ON A

LB L

V D

KEN

T AV

E

WIL

SON

AVE

BUCK

INGH

AM R

D

HEN

DERS

ON

RD

VERDIST

S SERVICE RD

ELTO

NPK

RD

BURNHAMTHORPE RD W

DUNDAS ST

OA K

C

RES

PACI

FIC

RD

SAVOYCRES

TREM

AIN

E RD

CO VE NT RY RD

PROG

R ESS

CT

GLEN ABBE Y GT

BERYL RD

HWY 407

HWY 407

INDUST RY

ST

JEZERO

CRES

ADAIR

C R E S

BALS

AM

DR

BRIGHTON RD

PORTLAND DR

I NV

I C

TA DR

HOSP

ITAL G

T

MELVIN AVE

REDW

OOD

SQ

VENE

T IA D R

COLO

N IA L

CRES

NIN

TH L

INE

HARRIS ON

CT

HW

Y40

3

MCP HERSO

NRD

C ASTL EF

I

ELDCRES

PALETTAC

T

P A L LA

DIUM WAY

SUPERIOR CT

NO 2 SIDE RD

FOURTH LINE

BELL

SCH

OO

L LI

NE

NSH

ER

IDAN WAY

IT ABASH I WAY

BURNHAMTHORPE RD E

WAL

KER'

SLI

NE

PATH

FIN

DE

R DR

DORVAL DR

BRAYS

LANE

TRAILSIDE

DR

E ST

QU

EEN

MAR

Y DR

TAY

L OR CRE S

RIVE

RVIEWST

SUTT

ON

DR

NAUTICAL BLVD

VALLE YR IDGE

DR

MO

HAWK

R D

NAVY

ST

CROSS AVE

NOTT

ING

HIL

LG

T

W YNTENW

AYDE VON RD

ALLA

N S

T

WIN

T ERB

OUR NEDR

FORD

DR

LEES

LAN

E

SUN

SET

DR

HEN

DER

SON

RD

WHITEO

AKSBLVD

BLUE SPRUCE AVE

DEER

HURS

TDR

CREE

KPA

TH

AVE

CORP

ORA

TE D

R

GRAND BLVD

POSTMASTER

DR

MILLCROFT PK DR

GRAND RAVINE DR

HERITAGEW

AY

SAN

DLE

WO

OD

RDRIVE RSID

ED

R

GRA

NDO

AKT R


END

R

MEADOWHILL

RD

TOWNE BLVD

RIV E

RBANK W AY

FOU

RTH

LIN

E

CHIS

HOLM

ST

K W

INTE

RRD

NIC

HOLS

DR

MA

DDE N

BLVD

TURNB ERRY

RD

FALGARWOOD DR

BAYSHIR E

DR

PILGRIM

S WAY

SALE

M R

D

STRATT O

N

RD

DUNV EGAN AV E

PINEGROVE RD

SE ATON

DR

STATIO

NM

ASTER

LAN E

ELIZ

A CR

ESB RID

L E

WOOD

DUNCAN RD

CL

UBVIEW DR

WIC

K LO W

R D

SAND

WEL

L D

R

GA

BLE DR

WO

O DH A

V EN

PKDR

PROU

DFO

OT

TR

C AR OL

RD

WINSTON

RD

OA

K PK BLVD

TRAC

INA

DR

TRUM

AN A

VE

HIDD ENTR

BRISTOL CIRC

CRE EKSIDE

DR

CRE S

T MON

TDR

THEL

MA

ST

BING

LEY

CR ES

ARM

OUR CRES

LINDS

AYD

R

HILL

ST

JOHN LUCAS DR

FIELDCREST LANE

PHOE

BE C

RES

S SERVICE RD E

PEN ST

CLEA

R VIE

WDR

OLD

BRO

NTE

RD

RAYNE AVE

N SERVICE R D E

ZEN

ON

DR

S SHERIDAN WAY

HERI

TAGE RD

THE CANADIAN RD

LYNDHURS

TDR

APPL

EBY

L IN

E

QUEEN ELIZABETH WAY

HIG

HW

AY 403

HIGHWAY 407

CORP LYLA

AQUI

ASCN

PATR

SHOJ

ANNE

CHRS

ELIZ

OLPO

ANDR

JOHO

MARG

MICH

MOTH

POPE

BERN

JOAN

MATT

HLYF

DOMI

STJAJOSO

LUKE

VINC

MARY

V31

P35

L3

K3L9 L7

M9

K8

K9

N9

L6

M4

M1

L4

L16

L18

L19 M20

K24

M21K21

K20

I37

W23

O8

O9

P3

P6 Q4

R7

R10 S15

S17

S8

U14

V14

W11

W14

X14Y20

Y13

T18

U17

W24

W25

V19

U19

U21U20

U22U23

U25

T20

T25

T24P26P25

S21

S18

S19

S20

P10

P19

P20

P21

P27

P22

V23

I38 V24P30

K16

O20

O21

O18

M22

P23

T21

W22

V17Y21

K26

U24

N1 O7

Q10

U16T14

P28

W21

V20

P24

W26W20

¯

Tow

n of

Oak

ville


CURRENT BOUNDARIES

0 1 2 3 4KMs


City

of B

urlin

gton

Town of Milton

Town of Oakville

City

of M

issi

ssau

ga

Tow

n of

Oak

ville

N

SER V

ICE

RD

SOLIN

GATE

DR

BURL

OAK

DR

HARVESTER RD

TRAFALGAR

RD

TRAF

ALGA

R RD

B RO

NT E

RD

MAINWAY

RAND O LPHC

RES

APPL

EBY

LIN

E

REGI

ON

AL R

D 25

KERR

ST

CHAR

TWEL

L RD

DES JARDINES DR

ELMWO OD RD

SPRUCE AVE

SIXTEEN MILE DR

KAITING TR

NEW ST

W ST

GATW

ICK DR

PINEHURST

DRM

APLE

GRO

VE D

R

REBECCA ST

CORNWALL RD

N PK BLVD

LAKESHORE RD

SIXT

H L

INE

WIN

STO

N C

HURC

HIL

L BL

VD

WEM BLEY

RD

GLA

DES IDE

AVE

SOVEREIGN ST

RIVER GLEN BLVD

MO

RRIS

ON

RD

CRAIGL EITH RD

EL MRD

MERIC O URT RD

FAIRVIEW ST

LAKESHORE RD E

ROBE

RT B

ROW

N BL

VD

DRYDEN AVE

GARLAN D

C R ES

VICTORIA ST

MIKALDARD

N RIDGE TR

GROSV EN

OR

ST

REBECCA ST

LONGMOOR

DR

DUNDAS ST E

STEVENSONRD

FORS

YTH

EST

DAVIS RD

REYN

OLD

S ST

JENN

AVE

RIDGE DR

TAUN

TON

RD

HOP KINS

DR

WIL

LIS

DR

GOO

DRA

MD

R

OA

KHAV

END

R

MA PLE AVE

KINGSW

AYDR

GLENASHTON DR

BA RTO

S DR

OXF

ORD

AVE

KESTELL

BLVD

ONTARIO ST

WAL

BY D

R

BARO

NW

OO

DDR

SENECA DR

FOTH

ERG

ILL

BLVD

POPL

ARDRW

ATSO

N A

VE

BRIDGE RD

GLEN VALLEY RD

RIVER OAKS BLVDW

PARK GLEN

AV E

WARREN DR

WYA

NDOTTE DR

TENN

YSO

NDR

BO ND ST


STEE

PL

ECHASE DR

CONSTANCE DR

MCCRANEYST

E

BURNET ST

BLOO

MFI

ELD

DR

BELYEA ST

G ULL ED GE

TR

T HOMAS ALTON BLVD

MARINE DR

DIGBY

RD

BRIDLE

W O O D

TR

LAKESHORE RD W

WILLIAM ST

BEVA

N DR

GR ANBY

DR

ARRO WHEAD RD

SANDPIPER RD

H AW T H OR NE D R

LAMPM

AN

AV E

O LD ABB EYLA

NE

ARBOUR V IEW DR

KING ST

RIVER OAKS BLVD E

YOLANDADR

RO SEWOODLAN

E

HOLTON

HTS DR

CA PEAVE

SPRUCE ST

JULI

A AV

E

GA MBLE

RD

C H E V ERIE ST

CULHAM ST

RIDGE

LNDG

LEIGHLAND AVE

IN GL EDE

NE

DR

SHER

WO

OD

HTS DRBU

RGU

NDY

DR

MISSISSAG

A ST

BENNETT RD

ANDO

VER

RD

DEANE AVE

MO

RDEN

RD

COSBURNCRES

THIR

DLI

NE

BUR TO

NRD

SHO

REAC

RES

RD

DUNEDIN RD

ERIN DALE

DR

A INTR EE

TERR

GRACE DR

TUCK

DR

SEAFARE DR

BENNING TON G T

VALLEYDR

HIXON ST

BERW

ICK

DR

OAK WALK DR

TANSLEY DR

DEER RU N A VE

GIBS

ON D

R

A LBIONAVE

WED

GEW

OO

D D

R

S ARAZEN DR

BIS HOPSG T

TAYWOOD DR

GLEN

OAK

DR

LAKEVIE W

DR

S TA

NFI

ELD

DR

MAP

LEH

URST

AVE

SABE

LST

REEVES RD

WES

TMI N

STER

DR

ROBINSON ST


NEYA

GAW

A BL

VDW

OO

DALE

AVE

RANDALL ST

STRATU

SD

R

JOHN ST

CLEAVER DR

ASHB

URY

RD

LINBROOK RD

POSTRI DGE

DR

FRONT ST


CHURCH ST

DOU

GLA

S AV

E

ROYAL WINDSOR DR

COLE CRES

SSERVICE RD W

SECO

ND S

T

EIG H

THL I

NE


PINEDALE AVE

MILLER RD

FIRST

ST

IROQUOIS SHORE RD

DUNDAS ST W

POST

RD

REEVESG T

N SER V ICE

RD

W

KHAL

SA G

T

STANBU RY RD

SPEERS RD

AR

GUS RD

ERWIN RD

NO 1 SIDE RD

G REENWO

OD

C RE

S

WESTMOUNT DR

CA R

EYRD

ROS EM OUN

TCRES

BOROSRD

S A LCOM

E

D R

WATERBRI

DG EDR

POPL

AR D

R

P LYMOUTH DR

DON

E SS L

ED R

IRON

ST

ONE DR

CAUL DERDR

PINE AVE

UPPER MIDDLE RD E

GATEW

AY

MO

NT C

L AIR

DR

WYECROFT RD

JOSH

UASCREE

KDR

INTE

RNA T

I ON A

LB L

V D

KEN

T AV

E

WIL

SON

AVE

BUCK

INGH

AM R

D

HEN

DERS

ON

RD

VERDIST

S SERVICE RD

ELTO

NPK

RD

BURNHAMTHORPE RD W

DUNDAS ST

OA K

C

RES

PACI

FIC

RD

SAVOYCRES

TREM

AIN

E RD

CO VE NT RY RD

PROG

R ESS

CT

GLEN ABBE Y GT

BERYL RD

HWY 407

HWY 407

INDUST RY

ST

JEZERO

CRES

ADAIR

C R E S

BALS

AM

DR

BRIGHTON RD

PORTLAND DR

I NV

I C

TA DR

HOSP

ITAL G

T

MELVIN AVE

REDW

OOD

SQ

VENE

T IA D R

COLO

N IA L

CRES

NIN

TH L

INE

HARRIS ON

CT

HW

Y40

3

MCP HERSO

NRD

C ASTL EF

I

ELDCRES

PALETTAC

T

P A L LA

DIUM WAY

SUPERIOR CT

NO 2 SIDE RD

FOURTH LINE

BELL

SCH

OO

L LI

NE

NSH

ER

IDAN WAY

IT ABASH I WAY

BURNHAMTHORPE RD E

WAL

KER'

SLI

NE

PATH

FIN

DE

R DR

DORVAL DR

BRAYS

LANE

TRAILSIDE

DR

E ST

QU

EEN

MAR

Y DR

TAY

L OR CRE S

RIVE

RVIEWST

SUTT

ON

DR

NAUTICAL BLVD

VALLE YR IDGE

DR

MO

HAWK

R D

NAVY

ST

CROSS AVE

NOTT

ING

HIL

LG

T

W YNTENW

AY

DE VON RD

ALLA

N S

T

WIN

T ERB

OUR NEDR

FORD

DR

LEES

LAN

E

SUN

SET

DR

HEN

DER

SON

RD

WHITEO

AKSBLVD

BLUE SPRUCE AVE

DEER

HURS

TDR

CREE

KPA

TH

AVE

CORP

ORA

TE D

R

GRAND BLVD

POSTMASTER

DR

MILLCROFT PK DR

GRAND RAVINE DR

HERITAGEW

AY

SAN

DLE

WO

OD

RDRIVE RSID

ED

R

GRA

NDO

AKT R


END

R

MEADOWHILL

RD

TOWNE BLVD

RIV E

RBANK W AY

FOU

RTH

LIN

E

CHIS

HOLM

ST

K W

INTE

RRD

NIC

HOLS

DR

MA

DDE N

BLVD

TURNB ERRY

RD

FALGARWOOD DR

BAYSHIR E

DR

PILGRIM

S WAY

SALE

M R

D

STRATT O

N

RD

DUNV EGAN AV E

PINEGROVE RD

SE ATON

DR

STATIO

NM

ASTER

LAN E

ELIZ

A CR

ESB RID

L E

WOOD

DUNCAN RD

CL

UBVIEW DR

WIC

K LO W

R D

SAND

WEL

L D

R

GA

BLE DR

WO

O DH A

V EN

PKDR

PROU

DFO

OT

TR

C AR OL

RD

WINSTON

RD

OA

K PK BLVD

TRAC

INA

DR

TRUM

AN A

VE

HIDD ENTR

BRISTOL CIRC

CRE EKSIDE

DR

CRE S

T MON

TDR

THEL

MA

ST

BING

LEY

CR ES

ARM

OUR CRES

LINDS

AYD

R

HILL

ST

JOHN LUCAS DR

FIELDCREST LANE

PHOE

BE C

RES

S SERVICE RD E

PEN ST

CLEA

R VIE

WDR

OLD

BRO

NTE

RD

RAYNE AVE

N SERVICE R D E

ZEN

ON

DR

S SHERIDAN WAY

HERI

TAGE RD

THE CANADIAN RD

LYNDHURS

TDR

APPL

EBY

L IN

E

QUEEN ELIZABETH WAY

HIG

HW

AY 403

HIGHWAY 407

CORP LYLA

AQUI

ASCN

PATR

SHOJ

ANNE

CHRS

ELIZ

OLPO

ANDR

JOHO

MARG

MICH

MOTH

POPE

BERN

JOAN

MATT

HLYF

DOMI

STJAJOSO

LUKE

VINC

MARY

V31

P35

L3

K3L9 L7

M9

K8

K9

N9

L6

M4

M1

L4

L16

L18

L19 M20

K24

M21K21

K20

I37

W23

O8

O9

P3

P6 Q4

R7

R10 S15

S17

S8

U14

V14

W11

W14

X14Y20

Y13

T18

U17

W24

W25

V19

U19

U21U20

U22U23

U25

T20

T25

T24P26P25

S21

S18

S19

S20

P10

P19

P20

P21

P27

P22

V23

I38 V24P30

K16

O20

O21

O18

M22

P23

T21

W22

V17Y21

K26

U24

N1 O7

Q10

U16T14

P28

W21

V20

P24

W26W20

¯

Tow

n of

Oak

ville


CURRENT BOUNDARIES

0 1 2 3 4KMs


City

of B

urlin

gton

Town of Milton

Town of Oakville

City

of M

issi

ssau

ga

Tow

n of

Oak

ville

N

SER V

ICE

RD

SOLIN

GATE

DR

BURL

OAK

DR

HARVESTER RD

TRAFALGAR

RD

TRAF

ALGA

R RD

B RO

NT E

RD

MAINWAY

RAND O LPHC

RES

APPL

EBY

LIN

E

REGI

ON

AL R

D 25

KERR

ST

CHAR

TWEL

L RD

DES JARDINES DR

ELMWO OD RD

SPRUCE AVE

SIXTEEN MILE DR

KAITING TR

NEW ST

W ST

GATW

ICK DR

PINEHURST

DRM

APLE

GRO

VE D

R

REBECCA ST

CORNWALL RD

N PK BLVD

LAKESHORE RD

SIXT

H L

INE

WIN

STO

N C

HURC

HIL

L BL

VD

WEM BLEY

RD

GLA

DES IDE

AVE

SOVEREIGN ST

RIVER GLEN BLVD

MO

RRIS

ON

RD

CRAIGL EITH RD

EL MRD

MERIC O URT RD

FAIRVIEW ST

LAKESHORE RD E

ROBE

RT B

ROW

N BL

VD

DRYDEN AVE

GARLAN D

C R ES

VICTORIA ST

MIKALDARD

N RIDGE TR

GROSV EN

OR

ST

REBECCA ST

LONGMOOR

DR

DUNDAS ST E

STEVENSONRD

FORS

YTH

EST

DAVIS RD

REYN

OLD

S ST

JENN

AVE

RIDGE DR

TAUN

TON

RD

HOP KINS

DR

WIL

LIS

DR

GOO

DRA

MD

R

OA

KHAV

END

R

MA PLE AVE

KINGSW

AYDR

GLENASHTON DR

BA RTO

S DR

OXF

ORD

AVE

KESTELL

BLVD

ONTARIO ST

WAL

BY D

R

BARO

NW

OO

DDR

SENECA DR

FOTH

ERG

ILL

BLVD

POPL

ARDRW

ATSO

N A

VE

BRIDGE RD

GLEN VALLEY RD

RIVER OAKS BLVDW

PARK GLEN

AV E

WARREN DR

WYA

NDOTTE DR

TENN

YSO

NDR

BO ND ST


STEE

PL

ECHASE DR

CONSTANCE DR

MCCRANEYST

E

BURNET ST

BLOO

MFI

ELD

DR

BELYEA ST

G ULL ED GE

TR

T HOMAS ALTON BLVD

MARINE DR

DIGBY

RD

BRIDLE

W O O D

TR

LAKESHORE RD W

WILLIAM ST

BEVA

N DR

GR ANBY

DR

ARRO WHEAD RD

SANDPIPER RD

H AW T H OR NE D R

LAMPM

AN

AV E

O LD ABB EYLA

NE

ARBOUR V IEW DR

KING ST

RIVER OAKS BLVD E

YOLANDADR

RO SEWOODLAN

E

HOLTON

HTS DR

CA PEAVE

SPRUCE ST

JULI

A AV

E

GA MBLE

RD

C H E V ERIE ST

CULHAM ST

RIDGE

LNDG

LEIGHLAND AVE

IN GL EDE

NE

DR

SHER

WO

OD

HTS DR

BURG

UND

Y DR

MISSISSAG

A ST

BENNETT RD

ANDO

VER

RD

DEANE AVE

MO

RDEN

RD

COSBURNCRES

THIR

DLI

NE

BUR TO

NRD

SHO

REAC

RES

RD

DUNEDIN RD

ERIN DALE

DR

A INTR EE

TERR

GRACE DR

TUCK

DR

SEAFARE DR

BENNING TON G T

VALLEYDR

HIXON ST

BERW

ICK

DR

OAK WALK DR

TANSLEY DR

DEER RU N A VE

GIBS

ON D

R

A LBIONAVE

WED

GEW

OO

D D

R

S ARAZEN DR

BIS HOPSG T

TAYWOOD DR

GLEN

OAK

DR

LAKEVIE W

DR

S TA

NFI

ELD

DR

MAP

LEH

URST

AVE

SABE

LST

REEVES RD

WES

TMI N

STER

DR

ROBINSON ST


NEYA

GAW

A BL

VDW

OO

DALE

AVE

RANDALL ST

STRATU

SD

R

JOHN ST

CLEAVER DR

ASHB

URY

RD

LINBROOK RD

POSTRI DGE

DR

FRONT ST


CHURCH ST

DOU

GLA

S AV

E

ROYAL WINDSOR DR

COLE CRES

SSERVICE RD W

SECO

ND S

T

EIG H

THL I

NE


PINEDALE AVE

MILLER RD

FIRST

ST

IROQUOIS SHORE RD

DUNDAS ST W

POST

RD

REEVESG T

N SER V ICE

RD

W

KHAL

SA G

T

STANBU RY RD

SPEERS RD

AR

GUS RD

ERWIN RD

NO 1 SIDE RD

G REENWO

OD

C RE

S

WESTMOUNT DR

CA R

EY

RD

ROS EM OUN

TCRES

BOROSRD

S A LCOM

E

D R

WATERBRI

DG EDR

POPL

AR D

R

P LYMOUTH DR

DON

E SS L

ED R

IRON

ST

ONE DR

CAUL DERDR

PINE AVE

UPPER MIDDLE RD E

GATEW

AY

MO

NT C

L AIR

DR

WYECROFT RD

JOSH

UASCREE

KDR

INTE

RNA T

I ON A

LB L

V D

KEN

T AV

E

WIL

SON

AVE

BUCK

INGH

AM R

D

HEN

DERS

ON

RD

VERDIST

S SERVICE RD

ELTO

NPK

RD

BURNHAMTHORPE RD W

DUNDAS ST

OA K

C

RES

PACI

FIC

RD

SAVOYCRES

TREM

AIN

E RD

CO VE NT RY RD

PROG

R ESS

CT

GLEN ABBE Y GT

BERYL RD

HWY 407

HWY 407

INDUST RY

ST

JEZERO

CRESADAIR

C R E S

BALS

AM

DR

BRIGHTON RD

PORTLAND DR

I NV

I C

TA DR

HOSP

ITAL G

T

MELVIN AVE

REDW

OOD

SQ

VENE

T IA D R

COLO

N IA L

CRES

NIN

TH L

INE

HARRIS ON

CT

HW

Y40

3

MCP HERSO

NRD

C ASTL EF

I

ELDCRES

PALETTAC

T

P A L LA

DIUM WAY

SUPERIOR CT

NO 2 SIDE RD

FOURTH LINE

BELL

SCH

OO

L LI

NE

NSH

ER

IDAN WAY

IT ABASH I WAY

BURNHAMTHORPE RD E

WAL

KER'

SLI

NE

PATH

FIN

DE

R DR

DORVAL DR

BRAYS

LANE

TRAILSIDE

DR

E ST

QU

EEN

MAR

Y DR

TAY

L OR CRE S

RIVE

RVIEWST

SUTT

ON

DR

NAUTICAL BLVD

VALLE YR IDGE

DR

MO

HAWK

R D

NAVY

ST

CROSS AVE

NOTT

ING

HIL

LG

T

W YNTENW

AY

DE VON RD

ALLA

N S

T

WIN

T ERB

OUR NEDR

FORD

DR

LEES

LAN

E

SUN

SET

DR

HEN

DER

SON

RD

WHITEO

AKSBLVD

BLUE SPRUCE AVE

DEER

HURS

TDR

CREE

KPA

TH

AVE

CORP

ORA

TE D

R

GRAND BLVD

POSTMASTER

DR

MILLCROFT PK DR

GRAND RAVINE DR

HERITAGEW

AY

SAN

DLE

WO

OD

RDRIVE RSID

ED

R

GRA

NDO

AKT R


END

R

MEADOWHILL

RD

TOWNE BLVD

RIV E

RBANK W AY

FOU

RTH

LIN

E

CHIS

HOLM

ST

K W

INTE

RRD

NIC

HOLS

DR

MA

DDE N

BLVD

TURNB ERRY

RD

FALGARWOOD DR

BAYSHIR E

DR

PILGRIM

S WAY

SALE

M R

D

STRATT O

N

RD

DUNV EGAN AV E

PINEGROVE RD

SE ATON

DR

STATIO

NM

ASTER

LAN E

ELIZ

A CR

ESB RID

L E

WOOD

DUNCAN RD

CL

UBVIEW DR

WIC

K LO W

R D

SAND

WEL

L D

R

GA

BLE DR

WO

O DH A

V EN

PKDR

PROU

DFO

OT

TR

C AR OL

RD

WINSTON

RD

OA

K PK BLVD

TRAC

INA

DR

TRUM

AN A

VE

HIDD ENTR

BRISTOL CIRC

CRE EKSIDE

DR

CRE S

T MON

TDR

THEL

MA

ST

BING

LEY

CR ES

ARM

OUR CRES

LINDS

AYD

R

HILL

ST

JOHN LUCAS DR

FIELDCREST LANE

PHOE

BE C

RES

S SERVICE RD E

PEN ST

CLEA

R VIE

WDR

OLD

BRO

NTE

RD

RAYNE AVE

N SERVICE R D E

ZEN

ON

DR

S SHERIDAN WAY

HERI

TAGE RD

THE CANADIAN RD

LYNDHURS

TDR

APPL

EBY

L IN

E

QUEEN ELIZABETH WAY

HIG

HW

AY 403

HIGHWAY 407

CORP LYLA

AQUI

ASCN

PATR

SHOJ

ANNE

CHRS

ELIZ

OLPO

ANDR

JOHO

MARG

MICH

MOTH

POPE

BERN

JOAN

MATT

HLYF

DOMI

STJAJOSO

LUKE

VINC

MARY

V31

P35

L3

K3L9 L7

M9

K8

K9

N9

L6

M4

M1

L4

L16

L18

L19 M20

K24

M21K21

K20

I37

W23

O8

O9

P3

P6 Q4

R7

R10 S15

S17

S8

U14

V14

W11

W14

X14Y20

Y13

T18

U17

W24

W25

V19

U19

U21U20

U22U23

U25

T20

T25

T24P26P25

S21

S18

S19

S20

P10

P19

P20

P21

P27

P22

V23

I38 V24P30

K16

O20

O21

O18

M22

P23

T21

W22

V17Y21

K26

U24

N1 O7

Q10

U16T14

P28

W21

V20

P24

W26W20

¯

Tow

n of

Oak

ville


CURRENT BOUNDARIES

0 1 2 3 4KMs


City

of B

urlin

gton

Town of Milton

Town of Oakville

City

of M

issi

ssau

ga

Tow

n of

Oak

ville

ACTIONS:• RedirectHolyFamilyCES

(PatchesV19&V20)fromSt.ThomasAquinasCSStowardsHolyTrinityCSS

• RedirectV23(NorthOakvilleSecondaryPlan)fromSt.ThomasAquinasCSStowardsHolyTrinityCSS


Page 29

Option 2 ENROLMENT

302

HLY

TLY

LAAQ

UI

OPTION #14 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19




HLYT

LYLA

AQUI

Page 30

Option 2 ENROLMENT

303

ACTIONS:• Redirect Holy Family

CES (Patches V19 & V20) from St. Thomas Aquinas CSS towards Holy Trinity CSS





1182 1233 1278

1327 1345 1327 1354 1360 1368 1406 1441 1468 1492 1490 1485 1483

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

1800

ENR

OLM

ENT

(HC

)

St. Ignatius of Loyola CSS - Enrolment Trend Option #1


1286 1299 1273 1238 1226 1206 1185 1175 1203 1212 1295

1369 1411 1449 1461 1473

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

1800

ENR

OLM

ENT

(HC

)

Holy Trinity CSS - Enrolment Trend Option #1

Page 31

Option 2 ENROLMENT

304







1182 1233 1278

1327 1345 1327 1354 1360 1368 1406 1441 1468 1492 1490 1485 1483

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

1800

ENR

OLM

ENT

(HC

)

St. Ignatius of Loyola CSS - Enrolment Trend Option #1


1286 1299 1273 1238 1226 1206 1185 1175 1203 1212 1295

1369 1411 1449 1461 1473

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

1800

ENR

OLM

ENT

(HC

)

Holy Trinity CSS - Enrolment Trend Option #1

Page 32

Option 2 ENROLMENT

305


1003 1070 1111

1169 1129 1134 1133 1144 1185 1258

1315 1333 1337 1297 1262 1232

0

250

500

750

1000

1250

1500

1750

ENR

OLM

ENT

(HC

)

St. Thomas of Aquinas CSS - Enrolment Trend Option #1

ACTIONS:• Redirect Holy Family

CES (Patches V19 & V20) from St. Thomas Aquinas CSS towards Holy Trinity CSS



St. Thomas of Aquinas Catholic Secondary School - Enrolment TrendOption2

Page 33

Option 2 ENROLMENT

306

OPTION 3

Page 34307

N

SER V

ICE

RD

SOLIN

GATE

DR

HAM

P TO

NH

EATH

RD

BURL

OAK

DR

HARVESTER RD

TRAFAL GAR

RD

TRAF

ALGA

R RD

B RO

NT E

RD

MAINWAY

RAND O LPHC

RES

APPL

EBY

LIN

E

REG

I ON A

LRD

25

KERR

ST

CHAR

TWEL

L RD

DES JARDINES DR

ELMWO OD RD

SPRUCE AVE

SIXTEEN MILE DR

KAITING TR

NEW ST

W ST

GATWICK D R

PINEHURST

DRM

APLE

GRO

VE D

R

REBECCA ST

CORNWALL RD

N PK BLVD

LAKESHORE RD

SAW

GRAS

S DR

S IXT

HL I

NE

WIN

STO

N C

HURC

HIL

L BL

VD

WEM BLEY

RD

GLA

DES IDE

AVE

SOVEREIGN ST


ELM

R D

FAIRVIEW ST

LAKESHORE RD E

ROBE

RT B

ROW

N BL

VD

GARLAN D

C R ES

VICTORIA ST

MIKALDARD

N RIDGE TR

GRO

SVEN

ORST

REBECCA ST

SH ERIDAN GRD NDR

LONGMOORDR

DUNDAS ST E

STEVENSONRD

FORS

YTH

EST

REYN

OLD

S ST

JENN

AVE

RIDGE DR

TAUN

TON

RD

HOP KINS

DR

WIL

LIS

DR

GOO

DRA

MD

R

OA

KHAV

END

R

MA PLE AVE

KINGSW

AYDR

GLENASHTON DR

BA RTO

S DR

OXF

ORD

AVE

KESTELL

BLVD

ONTARIO ST

WAL

BY D

R

BROMLEY RD

BARO

NW

OOD

DR

KERRY DR

SENECA DR

FOTH

ERG

ILL

BLVD

POPL

ARDR

WAT

SON

AVE

BRIDGE RD

GLEN VALLEY RD

RIVER OAKS BLVDW

PARK GLEN

AV E

WARREN DR

WYA

NDOTTE DR

TENN

YSO

NDR

BO ND ST


STEE

PL

ECHASE DR

CONSTANCE DR

MCCRANEYST

E

BURNET ST

BLOO

MFI

ELD

DR

BELYEA ST

G ULLED GE

TRT HOMAS ALTON BLVD

MARINE DR

DIGBY

RD

BRIDLE

W O O D

TR

LAKESHORE RD W

WILLIAM ST

BEVA

N DR

GR ANBY

DR

ARRO WHEAD RD

SANDPIPER RD

H AW T H OR NE D R

LAMPM

AN

AV E

O LD ABB EYLA

NE

ARBOUR V IEW DR

KING ST

RIVER OAKS BLVD E

YOLANDADR

HOLTON

HTS DR

CA PEAVE

SPRUCE ST

JULI

A AV

E

GA MBLE

RD

C H E V ERIE ST

CULHAM ST

RIDGE

LNDG

LEIGHLAND AVE

IN GL EDE

NE

DR

SHER

WO

OD

HTS DR

BURG

UND

Y DR

MISSISSAG

A ST

BENNETT RD

ANDO

VER

RD

DEANE AVE

MO

RDEN

RD

COSBURNCRES

THIR

D L

INE

BUR TO

NRD

SHO

REAC

RES

RD

DUNEDIN RD

ERIN DALE

DR

A INTR EE

TERR

GRACE DR

LONG

RI

DGE CRES

TUCK

DR

SEAFARE DR

BENNING TON GT

VALLEYDR

HIXON ST

BERW

ICK

DR

OAK WALK DR

TANSLEY DR

DEER RU N A VE

GIBS

ON D

R

A LBIONAVE

NIPIGO

N DR

WED

GEW

OO

D D

R

S ARAZEN DR

BIS HOPSG T

TAYWOOD DR

GLEN

OAK

DR

LAKEVIE W

DR

S TAN

FIE L

DDR

MAP

LEH

URST

AVE

SABE

LST

REEVES RD

WES

TMI N

STER

DR

ROBINSON ST


NEYA

GAW

A BL

VDW

OO

DALE

AVE

RANDALL ST

STRATU

SD R

JOHN ST

CLEAVER DR

ASHB

URY

RD

LINBROOK RD

POSTRI DGE

DR

FRONT ST


CHURCH ST

DOU

GLA

S AV

E

ROYAL WINDSOR DR

COLE CRES

SSERVICE RD W

SECO

ND S

T

EIG

HTH

LIN

E


PINEDALE AVE

MILLER RD

FIRST

ST

IROQUOIS SHORE RD


POST

RD

REEVESG T

N SERVICE RD W

KHAL

SA G

T

STANBU RY RD

SPEERS RD

AR

GUS RD

ERWIN RD

NO 1 SIDE RD

G REENWO

OD

C RE

S

WESTMOUNT DR

CA R

EY

RD

ROS EM OUN

TCRES

BOROSRD

S A LCOM

E

D R

WATERBRI

DG EDR

POPL

AR D

R

PL YMOUTH DR

DON

E SS L

ED R

IRON

ST

ONE DR

CAUL DERDR

PINE AVE

UPPER MIDDLE RD E

GATEW

AY

MO

NT C

L AIR

DR

WYECROFT RD

JOSH

UASCREE K

DR

INTE

RNA T

I ON A

LB L

V D

KEN

T AV

E

WIL

SON

AVE

BUCK

INGH

AM R

D

HEN

DERS

ON

RD

VERDIST

ELTO

NPK

RD

BURNHAMTHORPE RD W

DUNDAS ST

OA K

C

RES

PACI

FIC

RD

SAVOYCRES

TREM

AIN

E RD

CO VE NT RY RD

PROG

R ESS

CT

GLEN ABBE Y GT

BERYL RD

HWY 407

HWY 407

INDUST RY

ST

JEZERO

CRES

ADAIR

C R E S

BALS

AM

DR

BRIGHTON RD

PORTLAND DR

I NV

I C

TA DR

HOSP

ITAL G

T

CEN

TURY

DR

MELVIN AVE

SYSCON

R D

REDW

OOD

SQ

VENE

T IA D R

COLO

N IA L

CRES

NIN

TH L

INE

HARRIS ON

CT

HWY

403

MCP HERSO

NRD

C ASTL EF

I

ELDCRES

PALETTACT

PALLADIUM WAY

SUPERIOR CT

NO 2 SIDE RD

FOURTH LINE

BELL

SCH

OO

L LI

NE

NSH

ER

IDAN WAY

IT ABASH I WAY

BURNHAMTHORPE RD E

WAL

KER'

SLI

NE

PATH

F IND

ER DR

DORVALDR

BRAYS

LANE

TRAILSIDE

DR

E ST

QU

EEN

MAR

Y DR

TAY

L OR CRE S

RIVE

RVIEWST

SUTTO

ND

R

PINERY CRE S

NAUTICAL BLVD

VALLE YR IDG

ED

R

MO

HAWK

R D

NAVY

ST

CROSS AVE

NOTT

ING

HIL

LG

T

W YNTENW

AY

DEVON RD

ALLA

N S

T

WIN

T ERB

OUR NEDR

FORD

DR

LEES

LAN

E

SUN

SET

DR

HEN

DER

SON

RD

WHITEO

AKSBLVD

B LUE SPRUCE AVE

DEER

HURS

TDR

CREE

KPA

TH

AVE

CORP

ORA

TE D

R

GRAND

BLVD

POSTMASTER

DR

MILLCROFT PK DR

GRAND RAVINE DR

HERITAGEW

AY

SAN

DLE

WO

OD

RDRIVE RSID

ED

R

GRAN

DO

AKTR

FALLIN G GRE

END

R

MEADOWHILL

RD

TOWNE BLVD

RIV E

RBANK W AY

FOU

RTH

LIN

E

CHIS

HOLM

ST

K W

INTE

RRD

NIC

HOLS

DR

MA

DDE N

BLVD

TURNB ERRY

RD

FALGARWOOD DR

BAYSHIR E

DR

PILGRIM

S WAY

SALE

M R

D

STRATT O

N

RD

DUNV EGAN AV E

PINEGROVE RD

SE ATON

DR

STATIO

NM

ASTER

LAN E

ELIZ

A CR

ESB RID

L E

WOOD

DUNCAN RD

CL

UBVIEW DR

WIC

K LO W

R D

SAND

WEL

L D

R

GA

BLE DR

WO

O DH A

V EN

PKDR

PROUDFOO

TTR

C AR OL

RD

WINSTON

RD

TRAC

INA

DR

TRUM

AN A

VE

HIDD ENTR

BRISTOL CIRC

CRE EKSIDEDR

C RE S

T MON

TDR

PK A

VE

THEL

MA

ST

BING

LEY

CR ES

ARM

OUR CRES

LINDS

AYD

R

HILL

ST

JOHN LUCAS DR

FIELDCREST LANE

PHOE

BE C

RES

S SERVICE RD E

PEN ST

CLEA

R VIE

WDR

OLD

BRO

NTE

RD

S SERVICE RD

RAYNE AVE

N SERVICE RD E

ZEN

ON

DR

S SHERIDAN WAY

HERI

TAGE RD

THE CANADIAN RD

APPL

EBY

L IN

E

QUEEN ELIZ

ABETH W

AY

HIG

HW

AY 403

HIGHWAY 407

ASCN

PATR

SHOJ

ANNE

CHRS

ELIZ

OLPO

ANDR

JOHO

MARG

MICH

MOTH

POPE

BERN

JOAN

MATT

HLYF

DOMI

STJAJOSO

LUKE

VINC

MARY

V31

P35

L3

K3

L9

L7

M9

K8

K9

N9

L6

M4

M1

L4

L16

L18

L19 M20

K24

M21K21

K20

I37

W23

O8

O9

P3

P6 Q4

R7

R10 S15

S17

S8

U14

V14

W11

W14

X14 Y20

Y13

T18

U17

W24

W25

V19

U19

U21

U20U22

U25

T20

T25

T24

P26P25

S21

S18

S19

S20

P10

P19

P20

P21

P27

P22

V23

I38

V24P30

K16

O20

O21

O18

M22

P23

T21

W22

V17Y21

K26

U24

N1 O7

Q10

U16T14

P28

W21

V20

P24

W26

W20

CORP

HLYT

LYLA

AQUI

¯

Tow

n of

Oak

ville


OPTION #3B

0 1 2 3 4KMs


City

of B

urlin

gton

Town of Milton

Town of Oakville

City

of M

issi

ssau

ga

Tow

n of

Oak

ville

NORTH OAKVILE

CES

N

SER V

ICE

RD

SOLIN

GATE

DR

BURL

OAK

DR

HARVESTER RD

TRAFALGAR

RD

TRAF

ALGA

R RD

B RO

NT E

RD

MAINWAY

RAND O LPHC

RES

APPL

EBY

LIN

E

REGI

ON

AL R

D 25

KERR

ST

CHAR

TWEL

L RD

DES JARDINES DR

ELMWO OD RD

SPRUCE AVE

SIXTEEN MILE DR

KAITING TR

NEW ST

W ST

GATW

ICK DR

PINEHURST

DRM

APLE

GRO

VE D

R

REBECCA ST

CORNWALL RD

N PK BLVD

LAKESHORE RD

SIXT

H L

INE

WIN

STO

N C

HURC

HIL

L BL

VD

WEM BLEY

RD

GLA

DES IDE

AVE

SOVEREIGN ST

RIVER GLEN BLVD

MO

RRIS

ON

RD

CRAIGL EITH RD

EL MRD

MERIC O URT RD

FAIRVIEW ST

LAKESHORE RD E

ROBE

RT B

ROW

N BL

VD

DRYDEN AVE

GARLAN D

C R ES

VICTORIA ST

MIKALDARD

N RIDGE TR

GROSV EN

OR

ST

REBECCA ST

LONGMOOR

DR

DUNDAS ST E

STEVENSONRD

FORS

YTH

EST

DAVIS RD

REYN

OLD

S ST

JENN

AVE

RIDGE DR

TAUN

TON

RD

HOP KINS

DR

WIL

LIS

DR

GOO

DRA

MD

R

OA

KHAV

END

R

MA PLE AVE

KINGSW

AYDR

GLENASHTON DR

BA RTO

S DR

OXF

ORD

AVE

KESTELL

BLVD

ONTARIO ST

WAL

BY D

R

BARO

NW

OO

DDR

SENECA DR

FOTH

ERG

ILL

BLVD

POPL

ARDRW

ATSO

N A

VE

BRIDGE RD

GLEN VALLEY RD

RIVER OAKS BLVDW

PARK GLEN

AV E

WARREN DR

WYA

NDOTTE DR

TENN

YSO

NDR

BO ND ST


STEE

PL

ECHASE DR

CONSTANCE DR

MCCRANEYST

E

BURNET ST

BLOO

MFI

ELD

DR

BELYEA ST

G ULL ED GE

TR

T HOMAS ALTON BLVD

MARINE DR

DIGBY

RD

BRIDLE

W O O D

TR

LAKESHORE RD W

WILLIAM ST

BEVA

N DR

GR ANBY

DR

ARRO WHEAD RD

SANDPIPER RD

H AW T H OR NE D R

LAMPM

AN

AV E

O LD ABB EYLA

NE

ARBOUR V IEW DR

KING ST

RIVER OAKS BLVD E

YOLANDADR

RO SEWOODLAN

E

HOLTON

HTS DR

CA PEAVE

SPRUCE ST

JULI

A AV

E

GA MBLE

RD

C H E V ERIE ST

CULHAM ST

RIDGE

LNDG

LEIGHLAND AVE

IN GL EDE

NE

DR

SHER

WO

OD

HTS DR

BURG

UND

Y DR

MISSISSAG

A ST

BENNETT RD

ANDO

VER

RD

DEANE AVE

MO

RDEN

RD

COSBURNCRES

THIR

DLI

NE

BUR TO

NRD

SHO

REAC

RES

RD

DUNEDIN RD

ERIN DALE

DR

A INTR EE

TERR

GRACE DR

TUCK

DR

SEAFARE DR

BENNING TON G T

VALLEYDR

HIXON ST

BERW

ICK

DR

OAK WALK DR

TANSLEY DR

DEER RU N A VE

GIBS

ON D

R

A LBIONAVE

WED

GEW

OO

D D

R

S ARAZEN DR

BIS HOPSG T

TAYWOOD DR

GLEN

OAK

DR

LAKEVIE W

DR

S TA

NFI

ELD

DR

MAP

LEH

URST

AVE

SABE

LST

REEVES RD

WES

TMI N

STER

DR

ROBINSON ST


NEYA

GAW

A BL

VDW

OO

DALE

AVE

RANDALL ST

STRATU

SD

R

JOHN ST

CLEAVER DR

ASHB

URY

RD

LINBROOK RD

POSTRI DGE

DR

FRONT ST


CHURCH ST

DOU

GLA

S AV

E

ROYAL WINDSOR DR

COLE CRES

SSERVICE RD W

SECO

ND S

T

EIG H

THL I

NE


PINEDALE AVE

MILLER RD

FIRST

ST

IROQUOIS SHORE RD

DUNDAS ST W

POST

RD

REEVESG T

N SER V ICE

RD

W

KHAL

SA G

T

STANBU RY RD

SPEERS RD

AR

GUS RD

ERWIN RD

NO 1 SIDE RD

G REENWO

OD

C RE

S

WESTMOUNT DR

CA R

EY

RD

ROS EM OUN

TCRES

BOROSRD

S A LCOM

E

D R

WATERBRI

DG EDR

POPL

AR D

R

P LYMOUTH DR

DON

E SS L

ED R

IRON

ST

ONE DR

CAUL DERDR

PINE AVE

UPPER MIDDLE RD E

GATEW

AY

MO

NT C

L AIR

DR

WYECROFT RD

JOSH

UASCREE

KDR

INTE

RNA T

I ON A

LB L

V D

KEN

T AV

E

WIL

SON

AVE

BUCK

INGH

AM R

D

HEN

DERS

ON

RD

VERDIST

S SERVICE RD

ELTO

NPK

RD

BURNHAMTHORPE RD W

DUNDAS ST

OA K

C

RES

PACI

FIC

RD

SAVOYCRES

TREM

AIN

E RD

CO VE NT RY RD

PROG

R ESS

CT

GLEN ABBE Y GT

BERYL RD

HWY 407

HWY 407

INDUST RY

ST

JEZERO

CRESADAIR

C R E S

BALS

AM

DR

BRIGHTON RD

PORTLAND DR

I NV

I C

TA DR

HOSP

ITAL G

T

MELVIN AVE

REDW

OOD

SQ

VENE

T IA D R

COLO

N IA L

CRES

NIN

TH L

INE

HARRIS ON

CT

HW

Y40

3

MCP HERSO

NRD

C ASTL EF

I

ELDCRES

PALETTAC

T

P A L LA

DIUM WAY

SUPERIOR CT

NO 2 SIDE RD

FOURTH LINE

BELL

SCH

OO

L LI

NE

NSH

ER

IDAN WAY

IT ABASH I WAY

BURNHAMTHORPE RD E

WAL

KER'

SLI

NE

PATH

FIN

DE

R DR

DORVAL DR

BRAYS

LANE

TRAILSIDE

DR

E ST

QU

EEN

MAR

Y DR

TAY

L OR CRE S

RIVE

RVIEWST

SUTT

ON

DR

NAUTICAL BLVD

VALLE YR IDGE

DR

MO

HAWK

R D

NAVY

ST

CROSS AVE

NOTT

ING

HIL

LG

T

W YNTENW

AY

DE VON RD

ALLA

N S

T

WIN

T ERB

OUR NEDR

FORD

DR

LEES

LAN

E

SUN

SET

DR

HEN

DER

SON

RD

WHITEO

AKSBLVD

BLUE SPRUCE AVE

DEER

HURS

TDR

CREE

KPA

TH

AVE

CORP

ORA

TE D

R

GRAND BLVD

POSTMASTER

DR

MILLCROFT PK DR

GRAND RAVINE DR

HERITAGEW

AY

SAN

DLE

WO

OD

RDRIVE RSID

ED

R

GRA

NDO

AKT R


END

R

MEADOWHILL

RD

TOWNE BLVD

RIV E

RBANK W AY

FOU

RTH

LIN

E

CHIS

HOLM

ST

K W

INTE

RRD

NIC

HOLS

DR

MA

DDE N

BLVD

TURNB ERRY

RD

FALGARWOOD DR

BAYSHIR E

DR

PILGRIM

S WAY

SALE

M R

D

STRATT O

N

RD

DUNV EGAN AV E

PINEGROVE RD

SE ATON

DR

STATIO

NM

ASTER

LAN E

ELIZ

A CR

ESB RID

L E

WOOD

DUNCAN RD

CL

UBVIEW DR

WIC

K LO W

R D

SAND

WEL

L D

R

GA

BLE DR

WO

O DH A

V EN

PKDR

PROU

DFO

OT

TR

C AR OL

RD

WINSTON

RD

OA

K PK BLVD

TRAC

INA

DR

TRUM

AN A

VE

HIDD ENTR

BRISTOL CIRC

CRE EKSIDE

DR

CRE S

T MON

TDR

THEL

MA

ST

BING

LEY

CR ES

ARM

OUR CRES

LINDS

AYD

R

HILL

ST

JOHN LUCAS DR

FIELDCREST LANE

PHOE

BE C

RES

S SERVICE RD E

PEN ST

CLEA

R VIE

WDR

OLD

BRO

NTE

RD

RAYNE AVE

N SERVICE R D E

ZEN

ON

DR

S SHERIDAN WAY

HERI

TAGE RD

THE CANADIAN RD

LYNDHURS

TDR

APPL

EBY

L IN

E

QUEEN ELIZABETH WAY

HIG

HW

AY 403

HIGHWAY 407

CORP LYLA

AQUI

ASCN

PATR

SHOJ

ANNE

CHRS

ELIZ

OLPO

ANDR

JOHO

MARG

MICH

MOTH

POPE

BERN

JOAN

MATT

HLYF

DOMI

STJAJOSO

LUKE

VINC

MARY

V31

P35

L3

K3L9 L7

M9

K8

K9

N9

L6

M4

M1

L4

L16

L18

L19 M20

K24

M21K21

K20

I37

W23

O8

O9

P3

P6 Q4

R7

R10 S15

S17

S8

U14

V14

W11

W14

X14Y20

Y13

T18

U17

W24

W25

V19

U19

U21U20

U22U23

U25

T20

T25

T24P26P25

S21

S18

S19

S20

P10

P19

P20

P21

P27

P22

V23

I38 V24P30

K16

O20

O21

O18

M22

P23

T21

W22

V17Y21

K26

U24

N1 O7

Q10

U16T14

P28

W21

V20

P24

W26W20

¯

Tow

n of

Oak

ville


CURRENT BOUNDARIES

0 1 2 3 4KMs


City

of B

urlin

gton

Town of Milton

Town of Oakville

City

of M

issi

ssau

ga

Tow

n of

Oak

ville

N

SER V

ICE

RD

SOLIN

GATE

DR

BURL

OAK

DR

HARVESTER RD

TRAFALGAR

RD

TRAF

ALGA

R RD

B RO

NT E

RD

MAINWAY

RAND O LPHC

RES

APPL

EBY

LIN

E

REGI

ON

AL R

D 25

KERR

ST

CHAR

TWEL

L RD

DES JARDINES DR

ELMWO OD RD

SPRUCE AVE

SIXTEEN MILE DR

KAITING TR

NEW ST

W ST

GATW

ICK DR

PINEHURST

DRM

APLE

GRO

VE D

R

REBECCA ST

CORNWALL RD

N PK BLVD

LAKESHORE RD

SIXT

H L

INE

WIN

STO

N C

HURC

HIL

L BL

VD

WEM BLEY

RD

GLA

DES IDE

AVE

SOVEREIGN ST

RIVER GLEN BLVD

MO

RRIS

ON

RD

CRAIGL EITH RD

EL MRD

MERIC O URT RD

FAIRVIEW ST

LAKESHORE RD E

ROBE

RT B

ROW

N BL

VD

DRYDEN AVE

GARLAN D

C R ES

VICTORIA ST

MIKALDARD

N RIDGE TR

GROSV EN

OR

ST

REBECCA ST

LONGMOOR

DR

DUNDAS ST E

STEVENSONRD

FORS

YTH

EST

DAVIS RD

REYN

OLD

S ST

JENN

AVE

RIDGE DR

TAUN

TON

RD

HOP KINS

DR

WIL

LIS

DR

GOO

DRA

MD

R

OA

KHAV

END

R

MA PLE AVE

KINGSW

AYDR

GLENASHTON DR

BA RTO

S DR

OXF

ORD

AVE

KESTELL

BLVD

ONTARIO ST

WAL

BY D

R

BARO

NW

OO

DDR

SENECA DR

FOTH

ERG

ILL

BLVD

POPL

ARDRW

ATSO

N A

VE

BRIDGE RD

GLEN VALLEY RD

RIVER OAKS BLVDW

PARK GLEN

AV E

WARREN DR

WYA

NDOTTE DR

TENN

YSO

NDR

BO ND ST


STEE

PL

ECHASE DR

CONSTANCE DR

MCCRANEYST

E

BURNET ST

BLOO

MFI

ELD

DR

BELYEA ST

G ULL ED GE

TR

T HOMAS ALTON BLVD

MARINE DR

DIGBY

RD

BRIDLE

W O O D

TR

LAKESHORE RD W

WILLIAM ST

BEVA

N DR

GR ANBY

DR

ARRO WHEAD RD

SANDPIPER RD

H AW T H OR NE D R

LAMPM

AN

AV E

O LD ABB EYLA

NE

ARBOUR V IEW DR

KING ST

RIVER OAKS BLVD E

YOLANDADR

RO SEWOODLAN

E

HOLTON

HTS DR

CA PEAVE

SPRUCE ST

JULI

A AV

E

GA MBLE

RD

C H E V ERIE ST

CULHAM ST

RIDGE

LNDG

LEIGHLAND AVE

IN GL EDE

NE

DR

SHER

WO

OD

HTS DR

BURG

UND

Y DR

MISSISSAG

A ST

BENNETT RD

ANDO

VER

RD

DEANE AVE

MO

RDEN

RD

COSBURNCRES

THIR

DLI

NE

BUR TO

NRD

SHO

REAC

RES

RD

DUNEDIN RD

ERIN DALE

DR

A INTR EE

TERR

GRACE DR

TUCK

DR

SEAFARE DR

BENNING TON G T

VALLEYDR

HIXON ST

BERW

ICK

DR

OAK WALK DR

TANSLEY DR

DEER RU N A VE

GIBS

ON D

R

A LBIONAVE

WED

GEW

OO

D D

R

S ARAZEN DR

BIS HOPSG T

TAYWOOD DR

GLEN

OAK

DR

LAKEVIE W

DR

S TA

NFI

ELD

DR

MAP

LEH

URST

AVE

SABE

LST

REEVES RD

WES

TMI N

STER

DR

ROBINSON ST


NEYA

GAW

A BL

VDW

OO

DALE

AVE

RANDALL ST

STRATU

SD

R

JOHN ST

CLEAVER DR

ASHB

URY

RD

LINBROOK RD

POSTRI DGE

DR

FRONT ST


CHURCH ST

DOU

GLA

S AV

E

ROYAL WINDSOR DR

COLE CRES

SSERVICE RD W

SECO

ND S

T

EIG H

THL I

NE


PINEDALE AVE

MILLER RD

FIRST

ST

IROQUOIS SHORE RD

DUNDAS ST WPO

ST R

D

REEVESG T

N SER V ICE

RD

W

KHAL

SA G

T

STANBU RY RD

SPEERS RD

AR

GUS RD

ERWIN RD

NO 1 SIDE RD

G REENWO

OD

C RE

S

WESTMOUNT DR

CA R

EYRD

ROS EM OUN

TCRES

BOROSRD

S A LCOM

E

D R

WATERBRI

DG EDR

POPL

AR D

R

P LYMOUTH DRDO

NE S

S LE

D R

IRON

ST

ONE DR

CAUL DERDR

PINE AVE

UPPER MIDDLE RD E

GATEW

AY

MO

NT C

L AIR

DR

WYECROFT RD

JOSH

UASCREE

KDR

INTE

RNA T

I ON A

LB L

V D

KEN

T AV

E

WIL

SON

AVE

BUCK

INGH

AM R

D

HEN

DERS

ON

RD

VERDIST

S SERVICE RD

ELTO

NPK

RD

BURNHAMTHORPE RD W

DUNDAS ST

OA K

C

RES

PACI

FIC

RD

SAVOYCRES

TREM

AIN

E RD

CO VE NT RY RD

PROG

R ESS

CT

GLEN ABBE Y GT

BERYL RD

HWY 407

HWY 407

INDUST RY

ST

JEZERO

CRES

ADAIR

C R E S

BALS

AM

DR

BRIGHTON RD

PORTLAND DR

I NV

I C

TA DR

HOSP

ITAL G

T

MELVIN AVE

REDW

OOD

SQ

VENE

T IA D R

COLO

N IA L

CRES

NIN

TH L

INE

HARRIS ON

CT

HW

Y40

3

MCP HERSO

NRD

C ASTL EF

I

ELDCRES

PALETTAC

T

P A L LA

DIUM WAY

SUPERIOR CT

NO 2 SIDE RD

FOURTH LINE

BELL

SCH

OO

L LI

NE

NSH

ER

IDAN WAY

IT ABASH I WAY

BURNHAMTHORPE RD E

WAL

KER'

SLI

NE

PATH

FIN

DE

R DR

DORVAL DR

BRAYS

LANE

TRAILSIDE

DR

E ST

QU

EEN

MAR

Y DR

TAY

L OR CRE S

RIVE

RVIEWST

SUTT

ON

DR

NAUTICAL BLVD

VALLE YR IDGE

DR

MO

HAWK

R D

NAVY

ST

CROSS AVE

NOTT

ING

HIL

LG

T

W YNTENW

AYDE VON RD

ALLA

N S

T

WIN

T ERB

OUR NEDR

FORD

DR

LEES

LAN

E

SUN

SET

DR

HEN

DER

SON

RD

WHITEO

AKSBLVD

BLUE SPRUCE AVE

DEER

HURS

TDR

CREE

KPA

TH

AVE

CORP

ORA

TE D

R

GRAND BLVD

POSTMASTER

DR

MILLCROFT PK DR

GRAND RAVINE DR

HERITAGEW

AY

SAN

DLE

WO

OD

RDRIVE RSID

ED

R

GRA

NDO

AKT R


END

R

MEADOWHILL

RD

TOWNE BLVD

RIV E

RBANK W AY

FOU

RTH

LIN

E

CHIS

HOLM

ST

K W

INTE

RRD

NIC

HOLS

DR

MA

DDE N

BLVD

TURNB ERRY

RD

FALGARWOOD DR

BAYSHIR E

DR

PILGRIM

S WAY

SALE

M R

D

STRATT O

N

RD

DUNV EGAN AV E

PINEGROVE RD

SE ATON

DR

STATIO

NM

ASTER

LAN E

ELIZ

A CR

ESB RID

L E

WOOD

DUNCAN RD

CL

UBVIEW DR

WIC

K LO W

R D

SAND

WEL

L D

R

GA

BLE DR

WO

O DH A

V EN

PKDR

PROU

DFO

OT

TR

C AR OL

RD

WINSTON

RD

OA

K PK BLVD

TRAC

INA

DR

TRUM

AN A

VE

HIDD ENTR

BRISTOL CIRC

CRE EKSIDE

DR

CRE S

T MON

TDR

THEL

MA

ST

BING

LEY

CR ES

ARM

OUR CRES

LINDS

AYD

R

HILL

ST

JOHN LUCAS DR

FIELDCREST LANE

PHOE

BE C

RES

S SERVICE RD E

PEN ST

CLEA

R VIE

WDR

OLD

BRO

NTE

RD

RAYNE AVE

N SERVICE R D E

ZEN

ON

DR

S SHERIDAN WAY

HERI

TAGE RD

THE CANADIAN RD

LYNDHURS

TDR

APPL

EBY

L IN

E

QUEEN ELIZABETH WAY

HIG

HW

AY 403

HIGHWAY 407

CORP LYLA

AQUI

ASCN

PATR

SHOJ

ANNE

CHRS

ELIZ

OLPO

ANDR

JOHO

MARG

MICH

MOTH

POPE

BERN

JOAN

MATT

HLYF

DOMI

STJAJOSO

LUKE

VINC

MARY

V31

P35

L3

K3L9 L7

M9

K8

K9

N9

L6

M4

M1

L4

L16

L18

L19 M20

K24

M21K21

K20

I37

W23

O8

O9

P3

P6 Q4

R7

R10 S15

S17

S8

U14

V14

W11

W14

X14Y20

Y13

T18

U17

W24

W25

V19

U19

U21U20

U22U23

U25

T20

T25

T24P26P25

S21

S18

S19

S20

P10

P19

P20

P21

P27

P22

V23

I38 V24P30

K16

O20

O21

O18

M22

P23

T21

W22

V17Y21

K26

U24

N1 O7

Q10

U16T14

P28

W21

V20

P24

W26W20

¯

Tow

n of

Oak

ville


CURRENT BOUNDARIES

0 1 2 3 4KMs


City

of B

urlin

gton

Town of Milton

Town of Oakville

City

of M

issi

ssau

ga

Tow

n of

Oak

ville

N

SER V

ICE

RD

SOLIN

GATE

DR

BURL

OAK

DR

HARVESTER RD

TRAFALGAR

RD

TRAF

ALGA

R RD

B RO

NT E

RD

MAINWAY

RAND O LPHC

RES

APPL

EBY

LIN

E

REGI

ON

AL R

D 25

KERR

ST

CHAR

TWEL

L RD

DES JARDINES DR

ELMWO OD RD

SPRUCE AVE

SIXTEEN MILE DR

KAITING TR

NEW ST

W ST

GATW

ICK DR

PINEHURST

DRM

APLE

GRO

VE D

R

REBECCA ST

CORNWALL RD

N PK BLVD

LAKESHORE RD

SIXT

H L

INE

WIN

STO

N C

HURC

HIL

L BL

VD

WEM BLEY

RD

GLA

DES IDE

AVE

SOVEREIGN ST

RIVER GLEN BLVD

MO

RRIS

ON

RD

CRAIGL EITH RD

EL MRD

MERIC O URT RD

FAIRVIEW ST

LAKESHORE RD E

ROBE

RT B

ROW

N BL

VD

DRYDEN AVE

GARLAN D

C R ES

VICTORIA ST

MIKALDARD

N RIDGE TR

GROSV EN

OR

ST

REBECCA ST

LONGMOOR

DR

DUNDAS ST E

STEVENSONRD

FORS

YTH

EST

DAVIS RD

REYN

OLD

S ST

JENN

AVE

RIDGE DR

TAUN

TON

RD

HOP KINS

DR

WIL

LIS

DR

GOO

DRA

MD

R

OA

KHAV

END

R

MA PLE AVE

KINGSW

AYDR

GLENASHTON DR

BA RTO

S DR

OXF

ORD

AVE

KESTELL

BLVD

ONTARIO ST

WAL

BY D

R

BARO

NW

OO

DDR

SENECA DR

FOTH

ERG

ILL

BLVD

POPL

ARDRW

ATSO

N A

VE

BRIDGE RD

GLEN VALLEY RD

RIVER OAKS BLVDW

PARK GLEN

AV E

WARREN DR

WYA

NDOTTE DR

TENN

YSO

NDR

BO ND ST


STEE

PL

ECHASE DR

CONSTANCE DR

MCCRANEYST

E

BURNET ST

BLOO

MFI

ELD

DR

BELYEA ST

G ULL ED GE

TR

T HOMAS ALTON BLVD

MARINE DR

DIGBY

RD

BRIDLE

W O O D

TR

LAKESHORE RD W

WILLIAM ST

BEVA

N DR

GR ANBY

DR

ARRO WHEAD RD

SANDPIPER RD

H AW T H OR NE D R

LAMPM

AN

AV E

O LD ABB EYLA

NE

ARBOUR V IEW DR

KING ST

RIVER OAKS BLVD E

YOLANDADR

RO SEWOODLAN

E

HOLTON

HTS DR

CA PEAVE

SPRUCE ST

JULI

A AV

E

GA MBLE

RD

C H E V ERIE ST

CULHAM ST

RIDGE

LNDG

LEIGHLAND AVE

IN GL EDE

NE

DR

SHER

WO

OD

HTS DRBU

RGU

NDY

DR

MISSISSAG

A ST

BENNETT RD

ANDO

VER

RD

DEANE AVE

MO

RDEN

RD

COSBURNCRES

THIR

DLI

NE

BUR TO

NRD

SHO

REAC

RES

RD

DUNEDIN RD

ERIN DALE

DR

A INTR EE

TERR

GRACE DR

TUCK

DR

SEAFARE DR

BENNING TON G T

VALLEYDR

HIXON ST

BERW

ICK

DR

OAK WALK DR

TANSLEY DR

DEER RU N A VE

GIBS

ON D

RA LBIONAVE

WED

GEW

OO

D D

R

S ARAZEN DR

BIS HOPSG T

TAYWOOD DR

GLEN

OAK

DR

LAKEVIE W

DR

S TA

NFI

ELD

DR

MAP

LEH

URST

AVE

SABE

LST

REEVES RD

WES

TMI N

STER

DR

ROBINSON ST


NEYA

GAW

A BL

VDW

OO

DALE

AVE

RANDALL ST

STRATU

SD

R

JOHN ST

CLEAVER DR

ASHB

URY

RD

LINBROOK RD

POSTRI DGE

DR

FRONT ST


CHURCH ST

DOU

GLA

S AV

E

ROYAL WINDSOR DR

COLE CRES

SSERVICE RD W

SECO

ND S

T

EIG H

THL I

NE


PINEDALE AVE

MILLER RD

FIRST

ST

IROQUOIS SHORE RD

DUNDAS ST W

POST

RD

REEVESG T

N SER V ICE

RD

W

KHAL

SA G

T

STANBU RY RD

SPEERS RD

AR

GUS RD

ERWIN RD

NO 1 SIDE RD

G REENWO

OD

C RE

S

WESTMOUNT DR

CA R

EYRD

ROS EM OUN

TCRES

BOROSRD

S A LCOM

E

D R

WATERBRI

DG EDR

POPL

AR D

R

P LYMOUTH DR

DON

E SS L

ED R

IRON

ST

ONE DR

CAUL DERDR

PINE AVE

UPPER MIDDLE RD E

GATEW

AY

MO

NT C

L AIR

DR

WYECROFT RD

JOSH

UASCREE

KDR

INTE

RNA T

I ON A

LB L

V D

KEN

T AV

E

WIL

SON

AVE

BUCK

INGH

AM R

D

HEN

DERS

ON

RD

VERDIST

S SERVICE RD

ELTO

NPK

RD

BURNHAMTHORPE RD W

DUNDAS ST

OA K

C

RES

PACI

FIC

RD

SAVOYCRES

TREM

AIN

E RD

CO VE NT RY RD

PROG

R ESS

CT

GLEN ABBE Y GT

BERYL RD

HWY 407

HWY 407

INDUST RY

ST

JEZERO

CRES

ADAIR

C R E S

BALS

AM

DR

BRIGHTON RD

PORTLAND DR

I NV

I C

TA DR

HOSP

ITAL G

T

MELVIN AVE

REDW

OOD

SQ

VENE

T IA D R

COLO

N IA L

CRES

NIN

TH L

INE

HARRIS ON

CT

HW

Y40

3

MCP HERSO

NRD

C ASTL EF

I

ELDCRES

PALETTAC

T

P A L LA

DIUM WAY

SUPERIOR CT

NO 2 SIDE RD

FOURTH LINE

BELL

SCH

OO

L LI

NE

NSH

ER

IDAN WAY

IT ABASH I WAY

BURNHAMTHORPE RD E

WAL

KER'

SLI

NE

PATH

FIN

DE

R DR

DORVAL DR

BRAYS

LANE

TRAILSIDE

DR

E ST

QU

EEN

MAR

Y DR

TAY

L OR CRE S

RIVE

RVIEWST

SUTT

ON

DR

NAUTICAL BLVD

VALLE YR IDGE

DR

MO

HAWK

R D

NAVY

ST

CROSS AVE

NOTT

ING

HIL

LG

T

W YNTENW

AY

DE VON RD

ALLA

N S

T

WIN

T ERB

OUR NEDR

FORD

DR

LEES

LAN

E

SUN

SET

DR

HEN

DER

SON

RD

WHITEO

AKSBLVD

BLUE SPRUCE AVE

DEER

HURS

TDR

CREE

KPA

TH

AVE

CORP

ORA

TE D

R

GRAND BLVD

POSTMASTER

DR

MILLCROFT PK DR

GRAND RAVINE DR

HERITAGEW

AY

SAN

DLE

WO

OD

RDRIVE RSID

ED

R

GRA

NDO

AKT R


END

R

MEADOWHILL

RD

TOWNE BLVD

RIV E

RBANK W AY

FOU

RTH

LIN

E

CHIS

HOLM

ST

K W

INTE

RRD

NIC

HOLS

DR

MA

DDE N

BLVD

TURNB ERRY

RD

FALGARWOOD DR

BAYSHIR E

DR

PILGRIM

S WAY

SALE

M R

D

STRATT O

N

RD

DUNV EGAN AV E

PINEGROVE RD

SE ATON

DR

STATIO

NM

ASTER

LAN E

ELIZ

A CR

ESB RID

L E

WOOD

DUNCAN RD

CL

UBVIEW DR

WIC

K LO W

R D

SAND

WEL

L D

R

GA

BLE DR

WO

O DH A

V EN

PKDR

PROU

DFO

OT

TR

C AR OL

RD

WINSTON

RD

OA

K PK BLVD

TRAC

INA

DR

TRUM

AN A

VE

HIDD ENTR

BRISTOL CIRC

CRE EKSIDE

DR

CRE S

T MON

TDR

THEL

MA

ST

BING

LEY

CR ES

ARM

OUR CRES

LINDS

AYD

R

HILL

ST

JOHN LUCAS DR

FIELDCREST LANE

PHOE

BE C

RES

S SERVICE RD E

PEN ST

CLEA

R VIE

WDR

OLD

BRO

NTE

RD

RAYNE AVE

N SERVICE R D E

ZEN

ON

DR

S SHERIDAN WAY

HERI

TAGE RD

THE CANADIAN RD

LYNDHURS

TDR

APPL

EBY

L IN

E

QUEEN ELIZABETH WAY

HIG

HW

AY 403

HIGHWAY 407

CORP LYLA

AQUI

ASCN

PATR

SHOJ

ANNE

CHRS

ELIZ

OLPO

ANDR

JOHO

MARG

MICH

MOTH

POPE

BERN

JOAN

MATT

HLYF

DOMI

STJAJOSO

LUKE

VINC

MARY

V31

P35

L3

K3L9 L7

M9

K8

K9

N9

L6

M4

M1

L4

L16

L18

L19 M20

K24

M21K21

K20

I37

W23

O8

O9

P3

P6 Q4

R7

R10 S15

S17

S8

U14

V14

W11

W14

X14Y20

Y13

T18

U17

W24

W25

V19

U19

U21U20

U22U23

U25

T20

T25

T24P26P25

S21

S18

S19

S20

P10

P19

P20

P21

P27

P22

V23

I38 V24P30

K16

O20

O21

O18

M22

P23

T21

W22

V17Y21

K26

U24

N1 O7

Q10

U16T14

P28

W21

V20

P24

W26W20

¯

Tow

n of

Oak

ville


CURRENT BOUNDARIES

0 1 2 3 4KMs


City

of B

urlin

gton

Town of Milton

Town of Oakville

City

of M

issi

ssau

ga

Tow

n of

Oak

ville

N

SER V

ICE

RD

SOLIN

GATE

DR

BURL

OAK

DR

HARVESTER RD

TRAFALGAR

RD

TRAF

ALGA

R RD

B RO

NT E

RD

MAINWAY

RAND O LPHC

RES

APPL

EBY

LIN

E

REGI

ON

AL R

D 25

KERR

ST

CHAR

TWEL

L RD

DES JARDINES DR

ELMWO OD RD

SPRUCE AVE

SIXTEEN MILE DR

KAITING TR

NEW ST

W ST

GATW

ICK DR

PINEHURST

DRM

APLE

GRO

VE D

R

REBECCA ST

CORNWALL RD

N PK BLVD

LAKESHORE RD

SIXT

H L

INE

WIN

STO

N C

HURC

HIL

L BL

VD

WEM BLEY

RD

GLA

DES IDE

AVE

SOVEREIGN ST

RIVER GLEN BLVD

MO

RRIS

ON

RD

CRAIGL EITH RD

EL MRD

MERIC O URT RD

FAIRVIEW ST

LAKESHORE RD E

ROBE

RT B

ROW

N BL

VD

DRYDEN AVE

GARLAN D

C R ES

VICTORIA ST

MIKALDARD

N RIDGE TR

GROSV EN

OR

ST

REBECCA ST

LONGMOOR

DR

DUNDAS ST E

STEVENSONRD

FORS

YTH

EST

DAVIS RD

REYN

OLD

S ST

JENN

AVE

RIDGE DR

TAUN

TON

RD

HOP KINS

DR

WIL

LIS

DR

GOO

DRA

MD

R

OA

KHAV

END

R

MA PLE AVE

KINGSW

AYDR

GLENASHTON DR

BA RTO

S DR

OXF

ORD

AVE

KESTELL

BLVD

ONTARIO ST

WAL

BY D

R

BARO

NW

OO

DDR

SENECA DR

FOTH

ERG

ILL

BLVD

POPL

ARDRW

ATSO

N A

VE

BRIDGE RD

GLEN VALLEY RD

RIVER OAKS BLVDW

PARK GLEN

AV E

WARREN DR

WYA

NDOTTE DR

TENN

YSO

NDR

BO ND ST


STEE

PL

ECHASE DR

CONSTANCE DR

MCCRANEYST

E

BURNET ST

BLOO

MFI

ELD

DR

BELYEA ST

G ULL ED GE

TR

T HOMAS ALTON BLVD

MARINE DR

DIGBY

RD

BRIDLE

W O O D

TR

LAKESHORE RD W

WILLIAM ST

BEVA

N DR

GR ANBY

DR

ARRO WHEAD RD

SANDPIPER RD

H AW T H OR NE D R

LAMPM

AN

AV E

O LD ABB EYLA

NE

ARBOUR V IEW DR

KING ST

RIVER OAKS BLVD E

YOLANDADR

RO SEWOODLAN

E

HOLTON

HTS DR

CA PEAVE

SPRUCE ST

JULI

A AV

E

GA MBLE

RD

C H E V ERIE ST

CULHAM ST

RIDGE

LNDG

LEIGHLAND AVE

IN GL EDE

NE

DR

SHER

WO

OD

HTS DR

BURG

UND

Y DR

MISSISSAG

A ST

BENNETT RD

ANDO

VER

RD

DEANE AVE

MO

RDEN

RD

COSBURNCRES

THIR

DLI

NE

BUR TO

NRD

SHO

REAC

RES

RD

DUNEDIN RD

ERIN DALE

DR

A INTR EE

TERR

GRACE DR

TUCK

DR

SEAFARE DR

BENNING TON G T

VALLEYDR

HIXON ST

BERW

ICK

DR

OAK WALK DR

TANSLEY DR

DEER RU N A VE

GIBS

ON D

R

A LBIONAVE

WED

GEW

OO

D D

R

S ARAZEN DR

BIS HOPSG T

TAYWOOD DR

GLEN

OAK

DR

LAKEVIE W

DR

S TA

NFI

ELD

DR

MAP

LEH

URST

AVE

SABE

LST

REEVES RD

WES

TMI N

STER

DR

ROBINSON ST


NEYA

GAW

A BL

VDW

OO

DALE

AVE

RANDALL ST

STRATU

SD

R

JOHN ST

CLEAVER DR

ASHB

URY

RD

LINBROOK RD

POSTRI DGE

DR

FRONT ST


CHURCH ST

DOU

GLA

S AV

E

ROYAL WINDSOR DR

COLE CRES

SSERVICE RD W

SECO

ND S

T

EIG H

THL I

NE


PINEDALE AVE

MILLER RD

FIRST

ST

IROQUOIS SHORE RD

DUNDAS ST W

POST

RD

REEVESG T

N SER V ICE

RD

W

KHAL

SA G

T

STANBU RY RD

SPEERS RD

AR

GUS RD

ERWIN RD

NO 1 SIDE RD

G REENWO

OD

C RE

S

WESTMOUNT DR

CA R

EY

RD

ROS EM OUN

TCRES

BOROSRD

S A LCOM

E

D R

WATERBRI

DG EDR

POPL

AR D

R

P LYMOUTH DR

DON

E SS L

ED R

IRON

ST

ONE DR

CAUL DERDR

PINE AVE

UPPER MIDDLE RD E

GATEW

AY

MO

NT C

L AIR

DR

WYECROFT RD

JOSH

UASCREE

KDR

INTE

RNA T

I ON A

LB L

V D

KEN

T AV

E

WIL

SON

AVE

BUCK

INGH

AM R

D

HEN

DERS

ON

RD

VERDIST

S SERVICE RD

ELTO

NPK

RD

BURNHAMTHORPE RD W

DUNDAS ST

OA K

C

RES

PACI

FIC

RD

SAVOYCRES

TREM

AIN

E RD

CO VE NT RY RD

PROG

R ESS

CT

GLEN ABBE Y GT

BERYL RD

HWY 407

HWY 407

INDUST RY

ST

JEZERO

CRESADAIR

C R E S

BALS

AM

DR

BRIGHTON RD

PORTLAND DR

I NV

I C

TA DR

HOSP

ITAL G

T

MELVIN AVE

REDW

OOD

SQ

VENE

T IA D R

COLO

N IA L

CRES

NIN

TH L

INE

HARRIS ON

CT

HW

Y40

3

MCP HERSO

NRD

C ASTL EF

I

ELDCRES

PALETTAC

T

P A L LA

DIUM WAY

SUPERIOR CT

NO 2 SIDE RD

FOURTH LINE

BELL

SCH

OO

L LI

NE

NSH

ER

IDAN WAY

IT ABASH I WAY

BURNHAMTHORPE RD E

WAL

KER'

SLI

NE

PATH

FIN

DE

R DR

DORVAL DR

BRAYS

LANE

TRAILSIDE

DR

E ST

QU

EEN

MAR

Y DR

TAY

L OR CRE S

RIVE

RVIEWST

SUTT

ON

DR

NAUTICAL BLVD

VALLE YR IDGE

DR

MO

HAWK

R D

NAVY

ST

CROSS AVE

NOTT

ING

HIL

LG

T

W YNTENW

AY

DE VON RD

ALLA

N S

T

WIN

T ERB

OUR NEDR

FORD

DR

LEES

LAN

E

SUN

SET

DR

HEN

DER

SON

RD

WHITEO

AKSBLVD

BLUE SPRUCE AVE

DEER

HURS

TDR

CREE

KPA

TH

AVE

CORP

ORA

TE D

R

GRAND BLVD

POSTMASTER

DR

MILLCROFT PK DR

GRAND RAVINE DR

HERITAGEW

AY

SAN

DLE

WO

OD

RDRIVE RSID

ED

R

GRA

NDO

AKT R


END

R

MEADOWHILL

RD

TOWNE BLVD

RIV E

RBANK W AY

FOU

RTH

LIN

E

CHIS

HOLM

ST

K W

INTE

RRD

NIC

HOLS

DR

MA

DDE N

BLVD

TURNB ERRY

RD

FALGARWOOD DR

BAYSHIR E

DR

PILGRIM

S WAY

SALE

M R

D

STRATT O

N

RD

DUNV EGAN AV E

PINEGROVE RD

SE ATON

DR

STATIO

NM

ASTER

LAN E

ELIZ

A CR

ESB RID

L E

WOOD

DUNCAN RD

CL

UBVIEW DR

WIC

K LO W

R D

SAND

WEL

L D

R

GA

BLE DR

WO

O DH A

V EN

PKDR

PROU

DFO

OT

TR

C AR OL

RD

WINSTON

RD

OA

K PK BLVD

TRAC

INA

DR

TRUM

AN A

VE

HIDD ENTR

BRISTOL CIRC

CRE EKSIDE

DR

CRE S

T MON

TDR

THEL

MA

ST

BING

LEY

CR ES

ARM

OUR CRES

LINDS

AYD

R

HILL

ST

JOHN LUCAS DR

FIELDCREST LANE

PHOE

BE C

RES

S SERVICE RD E

PEN ST

CLEA

R VIE

WDR

OLD

BRO

NTE

RD

RAYNE AVE

N SERVICE R D E

ZEN

ON

DR

S SHERIDAN WAY

HERI

TAGE RD

THE CANADIAN RD

LYNDHURS

TDR

APPL

EBY

L IN

E

QUEEN ELIZABETH WAY

HIG

HW

AY 403

HIGHWAY 407

CORP LYLA

AQUI

ASCN

PATR

SHOJ

ANNE

CHRS

ELIZ

OLPO

ANDR

JOHO

MARG

MICH

MOTH

POPE

BERN

JOAN

MATT

HLYF

DOMI

STJAJOSO

LUKE

VINC

MARY

V31

P35

L3

K3L9 L7

M9

K8

K9

N9

L6

M4

M1

L4

L16

L18

L19 M20

K24

M21K21

K20

I37

W23

O8

O9

P3

P6 Q4

R7

R10 S15

S17

S8

U14

V14

W11

W14

X14Y20

Y13

T18

U17

W24

W25

V19

U19

U21U20

U22U23

U25

T20

T25

T24P26P25

S21

S18

S19

S20

P10

P19

P20

P21

P27

P22

V23

I38 V24P30

K16

O20

O21

O18

M22

P23

T21

W22

V17Y21

K26

U24

N1 O7

Q10

U16T14

P28

W21

V20

P24

W26W20

¯

Tow

n of

Oak

ville


CURRENT BOUNDARIES

0 1 2 3 4KMs


City

of B

urlin

gton

Town of Milton

Town of Oakville

City

of M

issi

ssau

ga

Tow

n of

Oak

ville



• RedirectP30&V24fromSt.ThomasAquinasCSStowardSt.IgnatiusofLoyolaCSS

**NOTE**St.MaryCESGrade8ClasseswillbesplitbetweenSt.ThomasAquinasCSS

andSt.IgnatiusofLoyolaCSSuntilthenewNorthOakvilleCESisopened,whichisanticipatedtobedirectedto

St.IgnatiusofLoyolaCSS.

Page 35

Option 3 ENROLMENT

308

OPTION #3B4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19




HLYT

LYLA

AQUI

HLY

TLY

LAAQ

UI

Page 36

Option 3 ENROLMENT

309


1111 1155 1195 1236 1258 1238 1254 1250 1247 1267 1285 1306 1321 1321 1319 1318

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

1800

ENR

OLM

ENT

(HC

)

St. Ignatius of Loyola CSS - Enrolment Trend Option #3B


1240 1251 1223 1183 1174 1153 1132 1124 1149 1156 1237

1311 1353 1392 1406 1419

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

1800

ENR

OLM

ENT

(HC

)

Holy Trinity CSS - Enrolment Trend Option #3B








ThisOptionwouldalsorequirethatasecondboundaryreviewbeundertaken

inthenext5-6years

Page 37

Option 3 ENROLMENT

310


1111 1155 1195 1236 1258 1238 1254 1250 1247 1267 1285 1306 1321 1321 1319 1318

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

1800

ENR

OLM

ENT

(HC

)

St. Ignatius of Loyola CSS - Enrolment Trend Option #3B


1240 1251 1223 1183 1174 1153 1132 1124 1149 1156 1237

1311 1353 1392 1406 1419

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

1800

ENR

OLM

ENT

(HC

)

Holy Trinity CSS - Enrolment Trend Option #3B



• Redirect P30 & V24 from St. Thomas Aquinas CSS toward St. Ignatius of Loyola CSS






inthenext5-6years

Page 38

Option 3 ENROLMENT

311






1120 1197

1244 1315

1268 1275 1286 1304 1361

1455 1529 1553 1566 1522 1483 1451

0

250

500

750

1000

1250

1500

1750

ENR

OLM

ENT

(HC

)

St. Thomas of Aquinas CSS - Enrolment Trend Option #3B





inthenext5-6years

Page 39

Option 3 ENROLMENT

312

OPTION 4

Page 40313

NORTH OAKVILE

CES

N

SER V

ICE

RD

SOLIN

GATE

DR

HAM

P TO

NH

EATH

RD

BURL

OAK

DR

HARVESTER RD

TRAFAL GAR

RD

TRAF

ALGA

R RD

B RO

NT E

RD

MAINWAY

RAND O LPHC

RES

APPL

EBY

LIN

E

REG

I ON A

LRD

25

KERR

ST

CHAR

TWEL

L RD

DES JARDINES DR

ELMWO OD RD

SPRUCE AVE

SIXTEEN MILE DR

KAITING TR

NEW ST

W ST

GATWICK D R

PINEHURST

DRM

APLE

GRO

VE D

R

REBECCA ST

CORNWALL RD

N PK BLVD

LAKESHORE RD

SAW

GRAS

S DR

S IXT

HL I

NE

WIN

STO

N C

HURC

HIL

L BL

VD

WEM BLEY

RD

GLA

DES IDE

AVE

SOVEREIGN ST


ELM

R D

FAIRVIEW ST

LAKESHORE RD E

ROBE

RT B

ROW

N BL

VD

GARLAN D

C R ES

VICTORIA ST

MIKALDARD

N RIDGE TR

GRO

SVEN

ORST

REBECCA ST

SH ERIDAN GRD NDR

LONGMOORDR

DUNDAS ST E

STEVENSONRD

FORS

YTH

EST

REYN

OLD

S ST

JENN

AVE

RIDGE DR

TAUN

TON

RD

HOP KINS

DR

WIL

LIS

DR

GOO

DRA

MD

R

OA

KHAV

END

R

MA PLE AVE

KINGSW

AYDR

GLENASHTON DR

BA RTO

S DR

OXF

ORD

AVE

KESTELL

BLVD

ONTARIO ST

WAL

BY D

R

BROMLEY RD

BARO

NW

OOD

DR

KERRY DR

SENECA DR

FOTH

ERG

ILL

BLVD

POPL

ARDR

WAT

SON

AVE

BRIDGE RD

GLEN VALLEY RD

RIVER OAKS BLVDW

PARK GLEN

AV E

WARREN DR

WYA

NDOTTE DR

TENN

YSO

NDR

BO ND ST


STEE

PL

ECHASE DR

CONSTANCE DR

MCCRANEYST

E

BURNET ST

BLOO

MFI

ELD

DR

BELYEA ST

G ULLED GE

TRT HOMAS ALTON BLVD

MARINE DR

DIGBY

RD

BRIDLE

W O O D

TR

LAKESHORE RD W

WILLIAM ST

BEVA

N DR

GR ANBY

DR

ARRO WHEAD RD

SANDPIPER RD

H AW T H OR NE D R

LAMPM

AN

AV E

O LD ABB EYLA

NE

ARBOUR V IEW DR

KING ST

RIVER OAKS BLVD E

YOLANDADR

HOLTON

HTS DR

CA PEAVE

SPRUCE ST

JULI

A AV

E

GA MBLE

RD

C H E V ERIE ST

CULHAM ST

RIDGE

LNDG

LEIGHLAND AVE

IN GL EDE

NE

DR

SHER

WO

OD

HTS DR

BURG

UND

Y DR

MISSISSAG

A ST

BENNETT RD

ANDO

VER

RD

DEANE AVE

MO

RDEN

RD

COSBURNCRES

THIR

D L

INE

BUR TO

NRD

SHO

REAC

RES

RD

DUNEDIN RD

ERIN DALE

DR

A INTR EE

TERR

GRACE DR

LONG

RI

DGE CRES

TUCK

DR

SEAFARE DR

BENNING TON GT

VALLEYDR

HIXON ST

BERW

ICK

DR

OAK WALK DR

TANSLEY DR

DEER RU N A VE

GIBS

ON D

R

A LBIONAVE

NIPIGO

N DR

WED

GEW

OO

D D

R

S ARAZEN DR

BIS HOPSG T

TAYWOOD DR

GLEN

OAK

DR

LAKEVIE W

DR

S TAN

FIE L

DDR

MAP

LEH

URST

AVE

SABE

LST

REEVES RD

WES

TMI N

STER

DR

ROBINSON ST


NEYA

GAW

A BL

VDW

OO

DALE

AVE

RANDALL ST

STRATU

SD R

JOHN ST

CLEAVER DR

ASHB

URY

RD

LINBROOK RD

POSTRI DGE

DR

FRONT ST


CHURCH ST

DOU

GLA

S AV

E

ROYAL WINDSOR DR

COLE CRES

SSERVICE RD W

SECO

ND S

T

EIG

HTH

LIN

E


PINEDALE AVE

MILLER RD

FIRST

ST

IROQUOIS SHORE RD


POST

RD

REEVESG T

N SERVICE RD W

KHAL

SA G

T

STANBU RY RD

SPEERS RD

AR

GUS RD

ERWIN RD

NO 1 SIDE RD

G REENWO

OD

C RE

S

WESTMOUNT DR

CA R

EY

RD

ROS EM OUN

TCRES

BOROSRD

S A LCOM

E

D R

WATERBRI

DG EDR

POPL

AR D

R

PL YMOUTH DR

DON

E SS L

ED R

IRON

ST

ONE DR

CAUL DERDR

PINE AVE

UPPER MIDDLE RD E

GATEW

AY

MO

NT C

L AIR

DR

WYECROFT RD

JOSH

UASCREE K

DR

INTE

RNA T

I ON A

LB L

V D

KEN

T AV

E

WIL

SON

AVE

BUCK

INGH

AM R

D

HEN

DERS

ON

RD

VERDIST

ELTO

NPK

RD

BURNHAMTHORPE RD W

DUNDAS ST

OA K

C

RES

PACI

FIC

RD

SAVOYCRES

TREM

AIN

E RD

CO VE NT RY RD

PROG

R ESS

CT

GLEN ABBE Y GT

BERYL RD

HWY 407

HWY 407

INDUST RY

ST

JEZERO

CRES

ADAIR

C R E S

BALS

AM

DR

BRIGHTON RD

PORTLAND DR

I NV

I C

TA DR

HOSP

ITAL G

T

CEN

TURY

DR

MELVIN AVE

SYSCON

R D

REDW

OOD

SQ

VENE

T IA D R

COLO

N IA L

CRES

NIN

TH L

INE

HARRIS ON

CT

HWY

403

MCP HERSO

NRD

C ASTL EF

I

ELDCRES

PALETTACT

PALLADIUM WAY

SUPERIOR CT

NO 2 SIDE RD

FOURTH LINE

BELL

SCH

OO

L LI

NE

NSH

ER

IDAN WAY

IT ABASH I WAY

BURNHAMTHORPE RD E

WAL

KER'

SLI

NE

PATH

F IND

ER DR

DORVALDR

BRAYS

LANE

TRAILSIDE

DR

E ST

QU

EEN

MAR

Y DR

TAY

L OR CRE S

RIVE

RVIEWST

SUTTO

ND

R

PINERY CRE S

NAUTICAL BLVD

VALLE YR IDG

ED

R

MO

HAWK

R D

NAVY

ST

CROSS AVE

NOTT

ING

HIL

LG

T

W YNTENW

AY

DEVON RD

ALLA

N S

T

WIN

T ERB

OUR NEDR

FORD

DR

LEES

LAN

E

SUN

SET

DR

HEN

DER

SON

RD

WHITEO

AKSBLVD

B LUE SPRUCE AVE

DEER

HURS

TDR

CREE

KPA

TH

AVE

CORP

ORA

TE D

R

GRAND

BLVD

POSTMASTER

DR

MILLCROFT PK DR

GRAND RAVINE DR

HERITAGEW

AY

SAN

DLE

WO

OD

RDRIVE RSID

ED

R

GRAN

DO

AKTR

FALLIN G GRE

END

R

MEADOWHILL

RD

TOWNE BLVD

RIV E

RBANK W AY

FOU

RTH

LIN

E

CHIS

HOLM

ST

K W

INTE

RRD

NIC

HOLS

DR

MA

DDE N

BLVD

TURNB ERRY

RD

FALGARWOOD DR

BAYSHIR E

DR

PILGRIM

S WAY

SALE

M R

D

STRATT O

N

RD

DUNV EGAN AV E

PINEGROVE RD

SE ATON

DR

STATIO

NM

ASTER

LAN E

ELIZ

A CR

ESB RID

L E

WOOD

DUNCAN RD

CL

UBVIEW DR

WIC

K LO W

R D

SAND

WEL

L D

R

GA

BLE DR

WO

O DH A

V EN

PKDR

PROUDFOO

TTR

C AR OL

RD

WINSTON

RD

TRAC

INA

DR

TRUM

AN A

VE

HIDD ENTR

BRISTOL CIRC

CRE EKSIDEDR

C RE S

T MON

TDR

PK A

VE

THEL

MA

ST

BING

LEY

CR ES

ARM

OUR CRES

LINDS

AYD

R

HILL

ST

JOHN LUCAS DR

FIELDCREST LANE

PHOE

BE C

RES

S SERVICE RD E

PEN ST

CLEA

R VIE

WDR

OLD

BRO

NTE

RD

S SERVICE RD

RAYNE AVE

N SERVICE RD E

ZEN

ON

DR

S SHERIDAN WAY

HERI

TAGE RD

THE CANADIAN RD

APPL

EBY

L IN

E

QUEEN ELIZ

ABETH W

AY

HIG

HW

AY 403

HIGHWAY 407

ASCN

PATR

SHOJ

ANNE

CHRS

ELIZ

OLPO

ANDR

JOHO

MARG

MICH

MOTH

POPE

BERN

JOAN

MATT

HLYF

DOMI

STJAJOSO

LUKE

VINC

MARY

V31

P35

L3

K3

L9

L7

M9

K8

K9

N9

L6

M4

M1

L4

L16

L18

L19 M20

K24

M21K21

K20

I37

W23

O8

O9

P3

P6 Q4

R7

R10 S15

S17

S8

U14

V14

W11

W14

X14 Y20

Y13

T18

U17

W24

W25

V19

U19

U21

U20U22

U25

T20

T25

T24

P26P25

S21

S18

S19

S20

P10

P19

P20

P21

P27

P22

V23

I38

V24P30

K16

O20

O21

O18

M22

P23

T21

W22

V17Y21

K26

U24

N1 O7

Q10

U16T14

P28

W21

V20

P24

W26

W20

CORP

HLYT

LYLA

AQUI

¯

Tow

n of

Oak

ville


OPTION #3A

0 1 2 3 4KMs


City

of B

urlin

gton

Town of Milton

Town of Oakville

City

of M

issi

ssau

ga

Tow

n of

Oak

ville

N

SER V

ICE

RD

SOLIN

GATE

DR

BURL

OAK

DR

HARVESTER RD

TRAFALGAR

RD

TRAF

ALGA

R RD

B RO

NT E

RD

MAINWAY

RAND O LPHC

RES

APPL

EBY

LIN

E

REGI

ON

AL R

D 25

KERR

ST

CHAR

TWEL

L RD

DES JARDINES DR

ELMWO OD RD

SPRUCE AVE

SIXTEEN MILE DR

KAITING TR

NEW ST

W ST

GATW

ICK DR

PINEHURST

DRM

APLE

GRO

VE D

R

REBECCA ST

CORNWALL RD

N PK BLVD

LAKESHORE RD

SIXT

H L

INE

WIN

STO

N C

HURC

HIL

L BL

VD

WEM BLEY

RD

GLA

DES IDE

AVE

SOVEREIGN ST

RIVER GLEN BLVD

MO

RRIS

ON

RD

CRAIGL EITH RD

EL MRD

MERIC O URT RD

FAIRVIEW ST

LAKESHORE RD E

ROBE

RT B

ROW

N BL

VD

DRYDEN AVE

GARLAN D

C R ES

VICTORIA ST

MIKALDARD

N RIDGE TR

GROSV EN

OR

ST

REBECCA ST

LONGMOOR

DR

DUNDAS ST E

STEVENSONRD

FORS

YTH

EST

DAVIS RD

REYN

OLD

S ST

JENN

AVE

RIDGE DR

TAUN

TON

RD

HOP KINS

DR

WIL

LIS

DR

GOO

DRA

MD

R

OA

KHAV

END

R

MA PLE AVE

KINGSW

AYDR

GLENASHTON DR

BA RTO

S DR

OXF

ORD

AVE

KESTELL

BLVD

ONTARIO ST

WAL

BY D

R

BARO

NW

OO

DDR

SENECA DR

FOTH

ERG

ILL

BLVD

POPL

ARDRW

ATSO

N A

VE

BRIDGE RD

GLEN VALLEY RD

RIVER OAKS BLVDW

PARK GLEN

AV E

WARREN DR

WYA

NDOTTE DR

TENN

YSO

NDR

BO ND ST


STEE

PL

ECHASE DR

CONSTANCE DR

MCCRANEYST

E

BURNET ST

BLOO

MFI

ELD

DR

BELYEA ST

G ULL ED GE

TR

T HOMAS ALTON BLVD

MARINE DR

DIGBY

RD

BRIDLE

W O O D

TR

LAKESHORE RD W

WILLIAM ST

BEVA

N DR

GR ANBY

DR

ARRO WHEAD RD

SANDPIPER RD

H AW T H OR NE D R

LAMPM

AN

AV E

O LD ABB EYLA

NE

ARBOUR V IEW DR

KING ST

RIVER OAKS BLVD E

YOLANDADR

RO SEWOODLAN

E

HOLTON

HTS DR

CA PEAVE

SPRUCE ST

JULI

A AV

E

GA MBLE

RD

C H E V ERIE ST

CULHAM ST

RIDGE

LNDG

LEIGHLAND AVE

IN GL EDE

NE

DR

SHER

WO

OD

HTS DR

BURG

UND

Y DR

MISSISSAG

A ST

BENNETT RD

ANDO

VER

RD

DEANE AVE

MO

RDEN

RD

COSBURNCRES

THIR

DLI

NE

BUR TO

NRD

SHO

REAC

RES

RD

DUNEDIN RD

ERIN DALE

DR

A INTR EE

TERR

GRACE DR

TUCK

DR

SEAFARE DR

BENNING TON G T

VALLEYDR

HIXON ST

BERW

ICK

DR

OAK WALK DR

TANSLEY DR

DEER RU N A VE

GIBS

ON D

R

A LBIONAVE

WED

GEW

OO

D D

R

S ARAZEN DR

BIS HOPSG T

TAYWOOD DR

GLEN

OAK

DR

LAKEVIE W

DR

S TA

NFI

ELD

DR

MAP

LEH

URST

AVE

SABE

LST

REEVES RD

WES

TMI N

STER

DR

ROBINSON ST


NEYA

GAW

A BL

VDW

OO

DALE

AVE

RANDALL ST

STRATU

SD

R

JOHN ST

CLEAVER DR

ASHB

URY

RD

LINBROOK RD

POSTRI DGE

DR

FRONT ST


CHURCH ST

DOU

GLA

S AV

E

ROYAL WINDSOR DR

COLE CRES

SSERVICE RD W

SECO

ND S

T

EIG H

THL I

NE


PINEDALE AVE

MILLER RD

FIRST

ST

IROQUOIS SHORE RD

DUNDAS ST W

POST

RD

REEVESG T

N SER V ICE

RD

W

KHAL

SA G

T

STANBU RY RD

SPEERS RD

AR

GUS RD

ERWIN RD

NO 1 SIDE RD

G REENWO

OD

C RE

S

WESTMOUNT DR

CA R

EY

RD

ROS EM OUN

TCRES

BOROSRD

S A LCOM

E

D R

WATERBRI

DG EDR

POPL

AR D

R

P LYMOUTH DR

DON

E SS L

ED R

IRON

ST

ONE DR

CAUL DERDR

PINE AVE

UPPER MIDDLE RD E

GATEW

AY

MO

NT C

L AIR

DR

WYECROFT RD

JOSH

UASCREE

KDR

INTE

RNA T

I ON A

LB L

V D

KEN

T AV

E

WIL

SON

AVE

BUCK

INGH

AM R

D

HEN

DERS

ON

RD

VERDIST

S SERVICE RD

ELTO

NPK

RD

BURNHAMTHORPE RD W

DUNDAS ST

OA K

C

RES

PACI

FIC

RD

SAVOYCRES

TREM

AIN

E RD

CO VE NT RY RD

PROG

R ESS

CT

GLEN ABBE Y GT

BERYL RD

HWY 407

HWY 407

INDUST RY

ST

JEZERO

CRESADAIR

C R E S

BALS

AM

DR

BRIGHTON RD

PORTLAND DR

I NV

I C

TA DR

HOSP

ITAL G

T

MELVIN AVE

REDW

OOD

SQ

VENE

T IA D R

COLO

N IA L

CRES

NIN

TH L

INE

HARRIS ON

CT

HW

Y40

3

MCP HERSO

NRD

C ASTL EF

I

ELDCRES

PALETTAC

T

P A L LA

DIUM WAY

SUPERIOR CT

NO 2 SIDE RD

FOURTH LINE

BELL

SCH

OO

L LI

NE

NSH

ER

IDAN WAY

IT ABASH I WAY

BURNHAMTHORPE RD E

WAL

KER'

SLI

NE

PATH

FIN

DE

R DR

DORVAL DR

BRAYS

LANE

TRAILSIDE

DR

E ST

QU

EEN

MAR

Y DR

TAY

L OR CRE S

RIVE

RVIEWST

SUTT

ON

DR

NAUTICAL BLVD

VALLE YR IDGE

DR

MO

HAWK

R D

NAVY

ST

CROSS AVE

NOTT

ING

HIL

LG

T

W YNTENW

AY

DE VON RD

ALLA

N S

T

WIN

T ERB

OUR NEDR

FORD

DR

LEES

LAN

E

SUN

SET

DR

HEN

DER

SON

RD

WHITEO

AKSBLVD

BLUE SPRUCE AVE

DEER

HURS

TDR

CREE

KPA

TH

AVE

CORP

ORA

TE D

R

GRAND BLVD

POSTMASTER

DR

MILLCROFT PK DR

GRAND RAVINE DR

HERITAGEW

AY

SAN

DLE

WO

OD

RDRIVE RSID

ED

R

GRA

NDO

AKT R


END

R

MEADOWHILL

RD

TOWNE BLVD

RIV E

RBANK W AY

FOU

RTH

LIN

E

CHIS

HOLM

ST

K W

INTE

RRD

NIC

HOLS

DR

MA

DDE N

BLVD

TURNB ERRY

RD

FALGARWOOD DR

BAYSHIR E

DR

PILGRIM

S WAY

SALE

M R

D

STRATT O

N

RD

DUNV EGAN AV E

PINEGROVE RD

SE ATON

DR

STATIO

NM

ASTER

LAN E

ELIZ

A CR

ESB RID

L E

WOOD

DUNCAN RD

CL

UBVIEW DR

WIC

K LO W

R D

SAND

WEL

L D

R

GA

BLE DR

WO

O DH A

V EN

PKDR

PROU

DFO

OT

TR

C AR OL

RD

WINSTON

RD

OA

K PK BLVD

TRAC

INA

DR

TRUM

AN A

VE

HIDD ENTR

BRISTOL CIRC

CRE EKSIDE

DR

CRE S

T MON

TDR

THEL

MA

ST

BING

LEY

CR ES

ARM

OUR CRES

LINDS

AYD

R

HILL

ST

JOHN LUCAS DR

FIELDCREST LANE

PHOE

BE C

RES

S SERVICE RD E

PEN ST

CLEA

R VIE

WDR

OLD

BRO

NTE

RD

RAYNE AVE

N SERVICE R D E

ZEN

ON

DR

S SHERIDAN WAY

HERI

TAGE RD

THE CANADIAN RD

LYNDHURS

TDR

APPL

EBY

L IN

E

QUEEN ELIZABETH WAY

HIG

HW

AY 403

HIGHWAY 407

CORP LYLA

AQUI

ASCN

PATR

SHOJ

ANNE

CHRS

ELIZ

OLPO

ANDR

JOHO

MARG

MICH

MOTH

POPE

BERN

JOAN

MATT

HLYF

DOMI

STJAJOSO

LUKE

VINC

MARY

V31

P35

L3

K3L9 L7

M9

K8

K9

N9

L6

M4

M1

L4

L16

L18

L19 M20

K24

M21K21

K20

I37

W23

O8

O9

P3

P6 Q4

R7

R10 S15

S17

S8

U14

V14

W11

W14

X14Y20

Y13

T18

U17

W24

W25

V19

U19

U21U20

U22U23

U25

T20

T25

T24P26P25

S21

S18

S19

S20

P10

P19

P20

P21

P27

P22

V23

I38 V24P30

K16

O20

O21

O18

M22

P23

T21

W22

V17Y21

K26

U24

N1 O7

Q10

U16T14

P28

W21

V20

P24

W26W20

¯

Tow

n of

Oak

ville


CURRENT BOUNDARIES

0 1 2 3 4KMs


City

of B

urlin

gton

Town of Milton

Town of Oakville

City

of M

issi

ssau

ga

Tow

n of

Oak

ville

N

SER V

ICE

RD

SOLIN

GATE

DR

BURL

OAK

DR

HARVESTER RD

TRAFALGAR

RD

TRAF

ALGA

R RD

B RO

NT E

RD

MAINWAY

RAND O LPHC

RES

APPL

EBY

LIN

E

REGI

ON

AL R

D 25

KERR

ST

CHAR

TWEL

L RD

DES JARDINES DR

ELMWO OD RD

SPRUCE AVE

SIXTEEN MILE DR

KAITING TR

NEW ST

W ST

GATW

ICK DR

PINEHURST

DRM

APLE

GRO

VE D

R

REBECCA ST

CORNWALL RD

N PK BLVD

LAKESHORE RD

SIXT

H L

INE

WIN

STO

N C

HURC

HIL

L BL

VD

WEM BLEY

RD

GLA

DES IDE

AVE

SOVEREIGN ST

RIVER GLEN BLVD

MO

RRIS

ON

RD

CRAIGL EITH RD

EL MRD

MERIC O URT RD

FAIRVIEW ST

LAKESHORE RD E

ROBE

RT B

ROW

N BL

VD

DRYDEN AVE

GARLAN D

C R ES

VICTORIA ST

MIKALDARD

N RIDGE TR

GROSV EN

OR

ST

REBECCA ST

LONGMOOR

DR

DUNDAS ST E

STEVENSONRD

FORS

YTH

EST

DAVIS RD

REYN

OLD

S ST

JENN

AVE

RIDGE DR

TAUN

TON

RD

HOP KINS

DR

WIL

LIS

DR

GOO

DRA

MD

R

OA

KHAV

END

R

MA PLE AVE

KINGSW

AYDR

GLENASHTON DR

BA RTO

S DR

OXF

ORD

AVE

KESTELL

BLVD

ONTARIO ST

WAL

BY D

R

BARO

NW

OO

DDR

SENECA DR

FOTH

ERG

ILL

BLVD

POPL

ARDRW

ATSO

N A

VE

BRIDGE RD

GLEN VALLEY RD

RIVER OAKS BLVDW

PARK GLEN

AV E

WARREN DR

WYA

NDOTTE DR

TENN

YSO

NDR

BO ND ST


STEE

PL

ECHASE DR

CONSTANCE DR

MCCRANEYST

E

BURNET ST

BLOO

MFI

ELD

DR

BELYEA ST

G ULL ED GE

TR

T HOMAS ALTON BLVD

MARINE DR

DIGBY

RD

BRIDLE

W O O D

TR

LAKESHORE RD W

WILLIAM ST

BEVA

N DR

GR ANBY

DR

ARRO WHEAD RD

SANDPIPER RD

H AW T H OR NE D R

LAMPM

AN

AV E

O LD ABB EYLA

NE

ARBOUR V IEW DR

KING ST

RIVER OAKS BLVD E

YOLANDADR

RO SEWOODLAN

E

HOLTON

HTS DR

CA PEAVE

SPRUCE ST

JULI

A AV

E

GA MBLE

RD

C H E V ERIE ST

CULHAM ST

RIDGE

LNDG

LEIGHLAND AVE

IN GL EDE

NE

DR

SHER

WO

OD

HTS DR

BURG

UND

Y DR

MISSISSAG

A ST

BENNETT RD

ANDO

VER

RD

DEANE AVE

MO

RDEN

RD

COSBURNCRES

THIR

DLI

NE

BUR TO

NRD

SHO

REAC

RES

RD

DUNEDIN RD

ERIN DALE

DR

A INTR EE

TERR

GRACE DR

TUCK

DR

SEAFARE DR

BENNING TON G T

VALLEYDR

HIXON ST

BERW

ICK

DR

OAK WALK DR

TANSLEY DR

DEER RU N A VE

GIBS

ON D

R

A LBIONAVE

WED

GEW

OO

D D

R

S ARAZEN DR

BIS HOPSG T

TAYWOOD DR

GLEN

OAK

DR

LAKEVIE W

DR

S TA

NFI

ELD

DR

MAP

LEH

URST

AVE

SABE

LST

REEVES RD

WES

TMI N

STER

DR

ROBINSON ST


NEYA

GAW

A BL

VDW

OO

DALE

AVE

RANDALL ST

STRATU

SD

R

JOHN ST

CLEAVER DR

ASHB

URY

RD

LINBROOK RD

POSTRI DGE

DR

FRONT ST


CHURCH ST

DOU

GLA

S AV

E

ROYAL WINDSOR DR

COLE CRES

SSERVICE RD W

SECO

ND S

T

EIG H

THL I

NE


PINEDALE AVE

MILLER RD

FIRST

ST

IROQUOIS SHORE RD

DUNDAS ST WPO

ST R

D

REEVESG T

N SER V ICE

RD

W

KHAL

SA G

T

STANBU RY RD

SPEERS RD

AR

GUS RD

ERWIN RD

NO 1 SIDE RD

G REENWO

OD

C RE

S

WESTMOUNT DR

CA R

EYRD

ROS EM OUN

TCRES

BOROSRD

S A LCOM

E

D R

WATERBRI

DG EDR

POPL

AR D

R

P LYMOUTH DRDO

NE S

S LE

D R

IRON

ST

ONE DR

CAUL DERDR

PINE AVE

UPPER MIDDLE RD E

GATEW

AY

MO

NT C

L AIR

DR

WYECROFT RD

JOSH

UASCREE

KDR

INTE

RNA T

I ON A

LB L

V D

KEN

T AV

E

WIL

SON

AVE

BUCK

INGH

AM R

D

HEN

DERS

ON

RD

VERDIST

S SERVICE RD

ELTO

NPK

RD

BURNHAMTHORPE RD W

DUNDAS ST

OA K

C

RES

PACI

FIC

RD

SAVOYCRES

TREM

AIN

E RD

CO VE NT RY RD

PROG

R ESS

CT

GLEN ABBE Y GT

BERYL RD

HWY 407

HWY 407

INDUST RY

ST

JEZERO

CRES

ADAIR

C R E S

BALS

AM

DR

BRIGHTON RD

PORTLAND DR

I NV

I C

TA DR

HOSP

ITAL G

T

MELVIN AVE

REDW

OOD

SQ

VENE

T IA D R

COLO

N IA L

CRES

NIN

TH L

INE

HARRIS ON

CT

HW

Y40

3

MCP HERSO

NRD

C ASTL EF

I

ELDCRES

PALETTAC

T

P A L LA

DIUM WAY

SUPERIOR CT

NO 2 SIDE RD

FOURTH LINE

BELL

SCH

OO

L LI

NE

NSH

ER

IDAN WAY

IT ABASH I WAY

BURNHAMTHORPE RD E

WAL

KER'

SLI

NE

PATH

FIN

DE

R DR

DORVAL DR

BRAYS

LANE

TRAILSIDE

DR

E ST

QU

EEN

MAR

Y DR

TAY

L OR CRE S

RIVE

RVIEWST

SUTT

ON

DR

NAUTICAL BLVD

VALLE YR IDGE

DR

MO

HAWK

R D

NAVY

ST

CROSS AVE

NOTT

ING

HIL

LG

T

W YNTENW

AYDE VON RD

ALLA

N S

T

WIN

T ERB

OUR NEDR

FORD

DR

LEES

LAN

E

SUN

SET

DR

HEN

DER

SON

RD

WHITEO

AKSBLVD

BLUE SPRUCE AVE

DEER

HURS

TDR

CREE

KPA

TH

AVE

CORP

ORA

TE D

R

GRAND BLVD

POSTMASTER

DR

MILLCROFT PK DR

GRAND RAVINE DR

HERITAGEW

AY

SAN

DLE

WO

OD

RDRIVE RSID

ED

R

GRA

NDO

AKT R


END

R

MEADOWHILL

RD

TOWNE BLVD

RIV E

RBANK W AY

FOU

RTH

LIN

E

CHIS

HOLM

ST

K W

INTE

RRD

NIC

HOLS

DR

MA

DDE N

BLVD

TURNB ERRY

RD

FALGARWOOD DR

BAYSHIR E

DR

PILGRIM

S WAY

SALE

M R

D

STRATT O

N

RD

DUNV EGAN AV E

PINEGROVE RD

SE ATON

DR

STATIO

NM

ASTER

LAN E

ELIZ

A CR

ESB RID

L E

WOOD

DUNCAN RD

CL

UBVIEW DR

WIC

K LO W

R D

SAND

WEL

L D

R

GA

BLE DR

WO

O DH A

V EN

PKDR

PROU

DFO

OT

TR

C AR OL

RD

WINSTON

RD

OA

K PK BLVD

TRAC

INA

DR

TRUM

AN A

VE

HIDD ENTR

BRISTOL CIRC

CRE EKSIDE

DR

CRE S

T MON

TDR

THEL

MA

ST

BING

LEY

CR ES

ARM

OUR CRES

LINDS

AYD

R

HILL

ST

JOHN LUCAS DR

FIELDCREST LANE

PHOE

BE C

RES

S SERVICE RD E

PEN ST

CLEA

R VIE

WDR

OLD

BRO

NTE

RD

RAYNE AVE

N SERVICE R D E

ZEN

ON

DR

S SHERIDAN WAY

HERI

TAGE RD

THE CANADIAN RD

LYNDHURS

TDR

APPL

EBY

L IN

E

QUEEN ELIZABETH WAY

HIG

HW

AY 403

HIGHWAY 407

CORP LYLA

AQUI

ASCN

PATR

SHOJ

ANNE

CHRS

ELIZ

OLPO

ANDR

JOHO

MARG

MICH

MOTH

POPE

BERN

JOAN

MATT

HLYF

DOMI

STJAJOSO

LUKE

VINC

MARY

V31

P35

L3

K3L9 L7

M9

K8

K9

N9

L6

M4

M1

L4

L16

L18

L19 M20

K24

M21K21

K20

I37

W23

O8

O9

P3

P6 Q4

R7

R10 S15

S17

S8

U14

V14

W11

W14

X14Y20

Y13

T18

U17

W24

W25

V19

U19

U21U20

U22U23

U25

T20

T25

T24P26P25

S21

S18

S19

S20

P10

P19

P20

P21

P27

P22

V23

I38 V24P30

K16

O20

O21

O18

M22

P23

T21

W22

V17Y21

K26

U24

N1 O7

Q10

U16T14

P28

W21

V20

P24

W26W20

¯

Tow

n of

Oak

ville


CURRENT BOUNDARIES

0 1 2 3 4KMs


City

of B

urlin

gton

Town of Milton

Town of Oakville

City

of M

issi

ssau

ga

Tow

n of

Oak

ville

N

SER V

ICE

RD

SOLIN

GATE

DR

BURL

OAK

DR

HARVESTER RD

TRAFALGAR

RD

TRAF

ALGA

R RD

B RO

NT E

RD

MAINWAY

RAND O LPHC

RES

APPL

EBY

LIN

E

REGI

ON

AL R

D 25

KERR

ST

CHAR

TWEL

L RD

DES JARDINES DR

ELMWO OD RD

SPRUCE AVE

SIXTEEN MILE DR

KAITING TR

NEW ST

W ST

GATW

ICK DR

PINEHURST

DRM

APLE

GRO

VE D

R

REBECCA ST

CORNWALL RD

N PK BLVD

LAKESHORE RD

SIXT

H L

INE

WIN

STO

N C

HURC

HIL

L BL

VD

WEM BLEY

RD

GLA

DES IDE

AVE

SOVEREIGN ST

RIVER GLEN BLVD

MO

RRIS

ON

RD

CRAIGL EITH RD

EL MRD

MERIC O URT RD

FAIRVIEW ST

LAKESHORE RD E

ROBE

RT B

ROW

N BL

VD

DRYDEN AVE

GARLAN D

C R ES

VICTORIA ST

MIKALDARD

N RIDGE TR

GROSV EN

OR

ST

REBECCA ST

LONGMOOR

DR

DUNDAS ST E

STEVENSONRD

FORS

YTH

EST

DAVIS RD

REYN

OLD

S ST

JENN

AVE

RIDGE DR

TAUN

TON

RD

HOP KINS

DR

WIL

LIS

DR

GOO

DRA

MD

R

OA

KHAV

END

R

MA PLE AVE

KINGSW

AYDR

GLENASHTON DR

BA RTO

S DR

OXF

ORD

AVE

KESTELL

BLVD

ONTARIO ST

WAL

BY D

R

BARO

NW

OO

DDR

SENECA DR

FOTH

ERG

ILL

BLVD

POPL

ARDRW

ATSO

N A

VE

BRIDGE RD

GLEN VALLEY RD

RIVER OAKS BLVDW

PARK GLEN

AV E

WARREN DR

WYA

NDOTTE DR

TENN

YSO

NDR

BO ND ST


STEE

PL

ECHASE DR

CONSTANCE DR

MCCRANEYST

E

BURNET ST

BLOO

MFI

ELD

DR

BELYEA ST

G ULL ED GE

TR

T HOMAS ALTON BLVD

MARINE DR

DIGBY

RD

BRIDLE

W O O D

TR

LAKESHORE RD W

WILLIAM ST

BEVA

N DR

GR ANBY

DR

ARRO WHEAD RD

SANDPIPER RD

H AW T H OR NE D R

LAMPM

AN

AV E

O LD ABB EYLA

NE

ARBOUR V IEW DR

KING ST

RIVER OAKS BLVD E

YOLANDADR

RO SEWOODLAN

E

HOLTON

HTS DR

CA PEAVE

SPRUCE ST

JULI

A AV

E

GA MBLE

RD

C H E V ERIE ST

CULHAM ST

RIDGE

LNDG

LEIGHLAND AVE

IN GL EDE

NE

DR

SHER

WO

OD

HTS DRBU

RGU

NDY

DR

MISSISSAG

A ST

BENNETT RD

ANDO

VER

RD

DEANE AVE

MO

RDEN

RD

COSBURNCRES

THIR

DLI

NE

BUR TO

NRD

SHO

REAC

RES

RD

DUNEDIN RD

ERIN DALE

DR

A INTR EE

TERR

GRACE DR

TUCK

DR

SEAFARE DR

BENNING TON G T

VALLEYDR

HIXON ST

BERW

ICK

DR

OAK WALK DR

TANSLEY DR

DEER RU N A VE

GIBS

ON D

RA LBIONAVE

WED

GEW

OO

D D

R

S ARAZEN DR

BIS HOPSG T

TAYWOOD DR

GLEN

OAK

DR

LAKEVIE W

DR

S TA

NFI

ELD

DR

MAP

LEH

URST

AVE

SABE

LST

REEVES RD

WES

TMI N

STER

DR

ROBINSON ST


NEYA

GAW

A BL

VDW

OO

DALE

AVE

RANDALL ST

STRATU

SD

R

JOHN ST

CLEAVER DR

ASHB

URY

RD

LINBROOK RD

POSTRI DGE

DR

FRONT ST


CHURCH ST

DOU

GLA

S AV

E

ROYAL WINDSOR DR

COLE CRES

SSERVICE RD W

SECO

ND S

T

EIG H

THL I

NE


PINEDALE AVE

MILLER RD

FIRST

ST

IROQUOIS SHORE RD

DUNDAS ST W

POST

RD

REEVESG T

N SER V ICE

RD

W

KHAL

SA G

T

STANBU RY RD

SPEERS RD

AR

GUS RD

ERWIN RD

NO 1 SIDE RD

G REENWO

OD

C RE

S

WESTMOUNT DR

CA R

EYRD

ROS EM OUN

TCRES

BOROSRD

S A LCOM

E

D R

WATERBRI

DG EDR

POPL

AR D

R

P LYMOUTH DR

DON

E SS L

ED R

IRON

ST

ONE DR

CAUL DERDR

PINE AVE

UPPER MIDDLE RD E

GATEW

AY

MO

NT C

L AIR

DR

WYECROFT RD

JOSH

UASCREE

KDR

INTE

RNA T

I ON A

LB L

V D

KEN

T AV

E

WIL

SON

AVE

BUCK

INGH

AM R

D

HEN

DERS

ON

RD

VERDIST

S SERVICE RD

ELTO

NPK

RD

BURNHAMTHORPE RD W

DUNDAS ST

OA K

C

RES

PACI

FIC

RD

SAVOYCRES

TREM

AIN

E RD

CO VE NT RY RD

PROG

R ESS

CT

GLEN ABBE Y GT

BERYL RD

HWY 407

HWY 407

INDUST RY

ST

JEZERO

CRES

ADAIR

C R E S

BALS

AM

DR

BRIGHTON RD

PORTLAND DR

I NV

I C

TA DR

HOSP

ITAL G

T

MELVIN AVE

REDW

OOD

SQ

VENE

T IA D R

COLO

N IA L

CRES

NIN

TH L

INE

HARRIS ON

CT

HW

Y40

3

MCP HERSO

NRD

C ASTL EF

I

ELDCRES

PALETTAC

T

P A L LA

DIUM WAY

SUPERIOR CT

NO 2 SIDE RD

FOURTH LINE

BELL

SCH

OO

L LI

NE

NSH

ER

IDAN WAY

IT ABASH I WAY

BURNHAMTHORPE RD E

WAL

KER'

SLI

NE

PATH

FIN

DE

R DR

DORVAL DR

BRAYS

LANE

TRAILSIDE

DR

E ST

QU

EEN

MAR

Y DR

TAY

L OR CRE S

RIVE

RVIEWST

SUTT

ON

DR

NAUTICAL BLVD

VALLE YR IDGE

DR

MO

HAWK

R D

NAVY

ST

CROSS AVE

NOTT

ING

HIL

LG

T

W YNTENW

AY

DE VON RD

ALLA

N S

T

WIN

T ERB

OUR NEDR

FORD

DR

LEES

LAN

E

SUN

SET

DR

HEN

DER

SON

RD

WHITEO

AKSBLVD

BLUE SPRUCE AVE

DEER

HURS

TDR

CREE

KPA

TH

AVE

CORP

ORA

TE D

R

GRAND BLVD

POSTMASTER

DR

MILLCROFT PK DR

GRAND RAVINE DR

HERITAGEW

AY

SAN

DLE

WO

OD

RDRIVE RSID

ED

R

GRA

NDO

AKT R


END

R

MEADOWHILL

RD

TOWNE BLVD

RIV E

RBANK W AY

FOU

RTH

LIN

E

CHIS

HOLM

ST

K W

INTE

RRD

NIC

HOLS

DR

MA

DDE N

BLVD

TURNB ERRY

RD

FALGARWOOD DR

BAYSHIR E

DR

PILGRIM

S WAY

SALE

M R

D

STRATT O

N

RD

DUNV EGAN AV E

PINEGROVE RD

SE ATON

DR

STATIO

NM

ASTER

LAN E

ELIZ

A CR

ESB RID

L E

WOOD

DUNCAN RD

CL

UBVIEW DR

WIC

K LO W

R D

SAND

WEL

L D

R

GA

BLE DR

WO

O DH A

V EN

PKDR

PROU

DFO

OT

TR

C AR OL

RD

WINSTON

RD

OA

K PK BLVD

TRAC

INA

DR

TRUM

AN A

VE

HIDD ENTR

BRISTOL CIRC

CRE EKSIDE

DR

CRE S

T MON

TDR

THEL

MA

ST

BING

LEY

CR ES

ARM

OUR CRES

LINDS

AYD

R

HILL

ST

JOHN LUCAS DR

FIELDCREST LANE

PHOE

BE C

RES

S SERVICE RD E

PEN ST

CLEA

R VIE

WDR

OLD

BRO

NTE

RD

RAYNE AVE

N SERVICE R D E

ZEN

ON

DR

S SHERIDAN WAY

HERI

TAGE RD

THE CANADIAN RD

LYNDHURS

TDR

APPL

EBY

L IN

E

QUEEN ELIZABETH WAY

HIG

HW

AY 403

HIGHWAY 407

CORP LYLA

AQUI

ASCN

PATR

SHOJ

ANNE

CHRS

ELIZ

OLPO

ANDR

JOHO

MARG

MICH

MOTH

POPE

BERN

JOAN

MATT

HLYF

DOMI

STJAJOSO

LUKE

VINC

MARY

V31

P35

L3

K3L9 L7

M9

K8

K9

N9

L6

M4

M1

L4

L16

L18

L19 M20

K24

M21K21

K20

I37

W23

O8

O9

P3

P6 Q4

R7

R10 S15

S17

S8

U14

V14

W11

W14

X14Y20

Y13

T18

U17

W24

W25

V19

U19

U21U20

U22U23

U25

T20

T25

T24P26P25

S21

S18

S19

S20

P10

P19

P20

P21

P27

P22

V23

I38 V24P30

K16

O20

O21

O18

M22

P23

T21

W22

V17Y21

K26

U24

N1 O7

Q10

U16T14

P28

W21

V20

P24

W26W20

¯

Tow

n of

Oak

ville


CURRENT BOUNDARIES

0 1 2 3 4KMs


City

of B

urlin

gton

Town of Milton

Town of Oakville

City

of M

issi

ssau

ga

Tow

n of

Oak

ville

N

SER V

ICE

RD

SOLIN

GATE

DR

BURL

OAK

DR

HARVESTER RD

TRAFALGAR

RD

TRAF

ALGA

R RD

B RO

NT E

RD

MAINWAY

RAND O LPHC

RES

APPL

EBY

LIN

E

REGI

ON

AL R

D 25

KERR

ST

CHAR

TWEL

L RD

DES JARDINES DR

ELMWO OD RD

SPRUCE AVE

SIXTEEN MILE DR

KAITING TR

NEW ST

W ST

GATW

ICK DR

PINEHURST

DRM

APLE

GRO

VE D

R

REBECCA ST

CORNWALL RD

N PK BLVD

LAKESHORE RD

SIXT

H L

INE

WIN

STO

N C

HURC

HIL

L BL

VD

WEM BLEY

RD

GLA

DES IDE

AVE

SOVEREIGN ST

RIVER GLEN BLVD

MO

RRIS

ON

RD

CRAIGL EITH RD

EL MRD

MERIC O URT RD

FAIRVIEW ST

LAKESHORE RD E

ROBE

RT B

ROW

N BL

VD

DRYDEN AVE

GARLAN D

C R ES

VICTORIA ST

MIKALDARD

N RIDGE TR

GROSV EN

OR

ST

REBECCA ST

LONGMOOR

DR

DUNDAS ST E

STEVENSONRD

FORS

YTH

EST

DAVIS RD

REYN

OLD

S ST

JENN

AVE

RIDGE DR

TAUN

TON

RD

HOP KINS

DR

WIL

LIS

DR

GOO

DRA

MD

R

OA

KHAV

END

R

MA PLE AVE

KINGSW

AYDR

GLENASHTON DR

BA RTO

S DR

OXF

ORD

AVE

KESTELL

BLVD

ONTARIO ST

WAL

BY D

R

BARO

NW

OO

DDR

SENECA DR

FOTH

ERG

ILL

BLVD

POPL

ARDRW

ATSO

N A

VE

BRIDGE RD

GLEN VALLEY RD

RIVER OAKS BLVDW

PARK GLEN

AV E

WARREN DR

WYA

NDOTTE DR

TENN

YSO

NDR

BO ND ST


STEE

PL

ECHASE DR

CONSTANCE DR

MCCRANEYST

E

BURNET ST

BLOO

MFI

ELD

DR

BELYEA ST

G ULL ED GE

TR

T HOMAS ALTON BLVD

MARINE DR

DIGBY

RD

BRIDLE

W O O D

TR

LAKESHORE RD W

WILLIAM ST

BEVA

N DR

GR ANBY

DR

ARRO WHEAD RD

SANDPIPER RD

H AW T H OR NE D R

LAMPM

AN

AV E

O LD ABB EYLA

NE

ARBOUR V IEW DR

KING ST

RIVER OAKS BLVD E

YOLANDADR

RO SEWOODLAN

E

HOLTON

HTS DR

CA PEAVE

SPRUCE ST

JULI

A AV

E

GA MBLE

RD

C H E V ERIE ST

CULHAM ST

RIDGE

LNDG

LEIGHLAND AVE

IN GL EDE

NE

DR

SHER

WO

OD

HTS DR

BURG

UND

Y DR

MISSISSAG

A ST

BENNETT RD

ANDO

VER

RD

DEANE AVE

MO

RDEN

RD

COSBURNCRES

THIR

DLI

NE

BUR TO

NRD

SHO

REAC

RES

RD

DUNEDIN RD

ERIN DALE

DR

A INTR EE

TERR

GRACE DR

TUCK

DR

SEAFARE DR

BENNING TON G T

VALLEYDR

HIXON ST

BERW

ICK

DR

OAK WALK DR

TANSLEY DR

DEER RU N A VE

GIBS

ON D

R

A LBIONAVE

WED

GEW

OO

D D

R

S ARAZEN DR

BIS HOPSG T

TAYWOOD DR

GLEN

OAK

DR

LAKEVIE W

DR

S TA

NFI

ELD

DR

MAP

LEH

URST

AVE

SABE

LST

REEVES RD

WES

TMI N

STER

DR

ROBINSON ST


NEYA

GAW

A BL

VDW

OO

DALE

AVE

RANDALL ST

STRATU

SD

R

JOHN ST

CLEAVER DR

ASHB

URY

RD

LINBROOK RD

POSTRI DGE

DR

FRONT ST


CHURCH ST

DOU

GLA

S AV

E

ROYAL WINDSOR DR

COLE CRES

SSERVICE RD W

SECO

ND S

T

EIG H

THL I

NE


PINEDALE AVE

MILLER RD

FIRST

ST

IROQUOIS SHORE RD

DUNDAS ST W

POST

RD

REEVESG T

N SER V ICE

RD

W

KHAL

SA G

T

STANBU RY RD

SPEERS RD

AR

GUS RD

ERWIN RD

NO 1 SIDE RD

G REENWO

OD

C RE

S

WESTMOUNT DR

CA R

EY

RD

ROS EM OUN

TCRES

BOROSRD

S A LCOM

E

D R

WATERBRI

DG EDR

POPL

AR D

R

P LYMOUTH DR

DON

E SS L

ED R

IRON

ST

ONE DR

CAUL DERDR

PINE AVE

UPPER MIDDLE RD E

GATEW

AY

MO

NT C

L AIR

DR

WYECROFT RD

JOSH

UASCREE

KDR

INTE

RNA T

I ON A

LB L

V D

KEN

T AV

E

WIL

SON

AVE

BUCK

INGH

AM R

D

HEN

DERS

ON

RD

VERDIST

S SERVICE RD

ELTO

NPK

RD

BURNHAMTHORPE RD W

DUNDAS ST

OA K

C

RES

PACI

FIC

RD

SAVOYCRES

TREM

AIN

E RD

CO VE NT RY RD

PROG

R ESS

CT

GLEN ABBE Y GT

BERYL RD

HWY 407

HWY 407

INDUST RY

ST

JEZERO

CRESADAIR

C R E S

BALS

AM

DR

BRIGHTON RD

PORTLAND DR

I NV

I C

TA DR

HOSP

ITAL G

T

MELVIN AVE

REDW

OOD

SQ

VENE

T IA D R

COLO

N IA L

CRES

NIN

TH L

INE

HARRIS ON

CT

HW

Y40

3

MCP HERSO

NRD

C ASTL EF

I

ELDCRES

PALETTAC

T

P A L LA

DIUM WAY

SUPERIOR CT

NO 2 SIDE RD

FOURTH LINE

BELL

SCH

OO

L LI

NE

NSH

ER

IDAN WAY

IT ABASH I WAY

BURNHAMTHORPE RD E

WAL

KER'

SLI

NE

PATH

FIN

DE

R DR

DORVAL DR

BRAYS

LANE

TRAILSIDE

DR

E ST

QU

EEN

MAR

Y DR

TAY

L OR CRE S

RIVE

RVIEWST

SUTT

ON

DR

NAUTICAL BLVD

VALLE YR IDGE

DR

MO

HAWK

R D

NAVY

ST

CROSS AVE

NOTT

ING

HIL

LG

T

W YNTENW

AY

DE VON RD

ALLA

N S

T

WIN

T ERB

OUR NEDR

FORD

DR

LEES

LAN

E

SUN

SET

DR

HEN

DER

SON

RD

WHITEO

AKSBLVD

BLUE SPRUCE AVE

DEER

HURS

TDR

CREE

KPA

TH

AVE

CORP

ORA

TE D

R

GRAND BLVD

POSTMASTER

DR

MILLCROFT PK DR

GRAND RAVINE DR

HERITAGEW

AY

SAN

DLE

WO

OD

RDRIVE RSID

ED

R

GRA

NDO

AKT R


END

R

MEADOWHILL

RD

TOWNE BLVD

RIV E

RBANK W AY

FOU

RTH

LIN

E

CHIS

HOLM

ST

K W

INTE

RRD

NIC

HOLS

DR

MA

DDE N

BLVD

TURNB ERRY

RD

FALGARWOOD DR

BAYSHIR E

DR

PILGRIM

S WAY

SALE

M R

D

STRATT O

N

RD

DUNV EGAN AV E

PINEGROVE RD

SE ATON

DR

STATIO

NM

ASTER

LAN E

ELIZ

A CR

ESB RID

L E

WOOD

DUNCAN RD

CL

UBVIEW DR

WIC

K LO W

R D

SAND

WEL

L D

R

GA

BLE DR

WO

O DH A

V EN

PKDR

PROU

DFO

OT

TR

C AR OL

RD

WINSTON

RD

OA

K PK BLVD

TRAC

INA

DR

TRUM

AN A

VE

HIDD ENTR

BRISTOL CIRC

CRE EKSIDE

DR

CRE S

T MON

TDR

THEL

MA

ST

BING

LEY

CR ES

ARM

OUR CRES

LINDS

AYD

R

HILL

ST

JOHN LUCAS DR

FIELDCREST LANE

PHOE

BE C

RES

S SERVICE RD E

PEN ST

CLEA

R VIE

WDR

OLD

BRO

NTE

RD

RAYNE AVE

N SERVICE R D E

ZEN

ON

DR

S SHERIDAN WAY

HERI

TAGE RD

THE CANADIAN RD

LYNDHURS

TDR

APPL

EBY

L IN

E

QUEEN ELIZABETH WAY

HIG

HW

AY 403

HIGHWAY 407

CORP LYLA

AQUI

ASCN

PATR

SHOJ

ANNE

CHRS

ELIZ

OLPO

ANDR

JOHO

MARG

MICH

MOTH

POPE

BERN

JOAN

MATT

HLYF

DOMI

STJAJOSO

LUKE

VINC

MARY

V31

P35

L3

K3L9 L7

M9

K8

K9

N9

L6

M4

M1

L4

L16

L18

L19 M20

K24

M21K21

K20

I37

W23

O8

O9

P3

P6 Q4

R7

R10 S15

S17

S8

U14

V14

W11

W14

X14Y20

Y13

T18

U17

W24

W25

V19

U19

U21U20

U22U23

U25

T20

T25

T24P26P25

S21

S18

S19

S20

P10

P19

P20

P21

P27

P22

V23

I38 V24P30

K16

O20

O21

O18

M22

P23

T21

W22

V17Y21

K26

U24

N1 O7

Q10

U16T14

P28

W21

V20

P24

W26W20

¯

Tow

n of

Oak

ville


CURRENT BOUNDARIES

0 1 2 3 4KMs


City

of B

urlin

gton

Town of Milton

Town of Oakville

City

of M

issi

ssau

ga

Tow

n of

Oak

ville







St.IgnatiusofLoyolaCSS.ThisOptionwouldalsorequirethata

secondboundaryreviewbeundertakeninthenext5-6years

Page 41

Option 4 ENROLMENT

314

HLY

TLY

LAAQ

UI

OPTION #3A4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19




HLYT

LYLA

AQUI

Page 42

Option 4 ENROLMENT

315

ACTIONS:• Redirect Holy Family CES

(Patches V19 & V20) from St. Thomas Aquinas CSS towards Holy Trinity CSS





1111 1155 1195 1236 1258 1238 1254 1250 1247 1267 1285 1306 1321 1321 1319 1318

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

1800

ENR

OLM

ENT

(HC

)



1286 1299 1273 1238 1226 1206 1185 1175 1203 1212 1295

1369 1411 1449 1461 1473

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

1800

ENR

OLM

ENT

(HC

)


Page 43

**NOTE**St.MaryCESGrade8ClasseswillbesplitbetweenSt.ThomasAquinasCSSandSt.IgnatiusofLoyolaCSSuntilthenewNorthOakvilleCESisopened,

whichisanticipatedtobedirectedtoSt.IgnatiusofLoyolaCSS.

ThisOptionwouldalsorequirethatasecondboundaryreviewbeundertakeninthenext5-6years

Option 4 ENROLMENT

316







1111 1155 1195 1236 1258 1238 1254 1250 1247 1267 1285 1306 1321 1321 1319 1318

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

1800

ENR

OLM

ENT

(HC

)



1286 1299 1273 1238 1226 1206 1185 1175 1203 1212 1295

1369 1411 1449 1461 1473

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

1800

ENR

OLM

ENT

(HC

)


Page 44




Option 4 ENROLMENT

317

ACTIONS:• Redirect Holy Family CES

(Patches V19 & V20) from St. Thomas Aquinas CSS towards Holy Trinity CSS





1074 1148 1194

1261 1216 1222 1233 1254 1306

1398 1471 1495 1508 1465 1428 1398

0

250

500

750

1000

1250

1500

1750

ENR

OLM

ENT

(HC

)

St. Thomas of Aquinas CSS - Enrolment Trend Option #3A

Page 45




Option 4 ENROLMENT

318

NEXT STEPS

Page 16319

Community Consultation Meeting

• April13,2015atSt.IgnatiusofLoyolaCatholicSecondarySchool

• Advertised&communicatedtothecommunity

• Parentsrequiredtoregister

• CommunityConsultationMeetingProcess

• Writtenfeedback

Page 46320

Next Steps

MILESTONES DATES

1. CommunityConsultationMeeting April 13, 2015

2. SBRCReviewsOptions&CommunityInput May 14, 2015

3. SBRCFinalReportpostedonwebsite May 28, 2015

4. SBRCFinalReport&Recommendations June 2, 2015

presentedtotheBoard

5. BoardreceivesDelegationsandapprovesnew June 16, 2015

secondaryschoolboundaries

Page 47321

Notes

Page 47322

Notes

Page 47323

APPENDIX C

325

328

http://www.hcdsb.org/


1

SBRC MEMBER QUESTIONS (Paraphrased) Oakville Catholic Secondary School Boundary Review Committee Meeting #1

1. “How or where does the HCDSB get these student enrolment projections from?” Staff explained the formula the HCDSB uses for projecting student enrolment: Current enrolment counts by school as a base Historical Trends Review of Development Applications Historical Yield information from new development Municipal Property Assessment Corporation (MPAC) data

2. “Why didn’t you see this coming the last time you did a boundary change?”

Staff explained that at the time of the last boundary review in Oakville, the HCDSB knew that Oakville would require another boundary review in the near future. At the time of the last boundary change, there was no possible option that would prevent another boundary review from having to happen. In addition, Staff also explained that the rate of growth within the area North of Dundas, in the North Oakville Secondary plan, is generating a larger number of students than what was previously expected.

3. “Are there any plans for a fourth secondary school in Oakville?”

Staff explained that there are no current plans for a new secondary school in Oakville in the near future.

4. “It is unfair that students who are currently in Grade 7, and who have been looking forward to and planning to go to a certain secondary school, will now be made to go somewhere else.”

Staff explained that the HCDSB created the options while keeping Grade 7 students in mind. The intent is to affect as few schools as possible and this should be discussed further when reviewing and considering the options.

5. “Does the Frasier Institute have anything to do with the need for a boundary change?”

Staff explained that the need for a boundary change is based only on current and projected student enrolment numbers.

6. “Is the popularity of the IB Program at St. Thomas Aquinas the reason for it being nearly over capacity? Should we implement the same type of programs into the other two Oakville secondary schools?”

Staff explained that while the IB Program is bringing in students from outside the St. Thomas Aquinas boundary, the IB Program is not the primary reason a boundary review is needed. Staff also explained that St. Thomas Aquinas will be the only secondary school in Oakville with this program. Staff continued to explain that, although the two other Oakville secondary schools do not offer the IB Program specifically, they each offer various specialty programs that are also popular in their own right.

7. “Can a student choose any secondary school they want to go to?”

Staff explained the Cross Boundary Request process is always an option, but is not guaranteed.

APPENDIX D

329

2

8. “The red bar on the graph [which represents Cross Boundary students] is 20% at St. Thomas Aquinas - why is this so high?” Staff explained the various students that are included in the Cross Boundary group: Students in specialty programs like the IB Program and French Immersion Compassionate circumstances

9. “The amount of Cross Boundary students at the other Oakville secondary schools is also high. Why can’t you just deny all Cross Boundary Requests? Would this solve the issue?”

Staff explained that even if all students were forced to go to their home school only, there would still be the same enrolment issues. Staff also explained that every Cross Boundary Request is carefully reviewed and there is a good reason behind each student whose Cross Boundary Request is approved.

10. “Is there any information for when Holy Family was directed to Holy Trinity? Did a higher percentage of students go to the public high school?”

Staff explained that yes, whenever there is an elementary school closer to a public secondary school, the retention rate will be lower.

11. “Are there any opportunities for capital projects for any of the Oakville secondary schools?”

Staff explained that no, there are no opportunities as the Ministry of Education does not consider any of our Oakville secondary schools a priority for the province.

12. “Is there an elementary school boundary review happening in Oakville?”

There will not be a need for an elementary school boundary review in Oakville until the Ministry of Education approves a new school North of Dundas.

330

of 5

Halton Catholic District School Board Oakville Catholic Secondary Schools School Boundary Review Committee Interim Report April 7, 2015 1. PURPOSE To provide information on the status of the Oakville Catholic Secondary Schools Boundary Review process currently underway. 2. DISCUSSION Background

1) Board staff completed the yearly enrolment projections in December 2014..

2) The Oakville Catholic Secondary School Boundary Review process was initiated in February 2015.

Board staff prepared a report that includes enrolment projections for each of Oakville’s Catholic secondary schools. This report outlines the need for a school boundary review.

3) An Oakville Catholic Secondary School Boundary Review Advisory Committee was established in March 2015. Representatives (parents/school representatives) from each of Oakville’s Catholic elementary and secondary schools were asked to sit on this Committee to ensure openness, fairness and transparency in the Boundary Review process.

4) The SBRC’s first meeting was held on March 4, 2015 at St. Mary Catholic Elementary School.

March 4, 2015 – Oakville Catholic Secondary SBRC, Meeting #1 The purpose of this meeting was to outline the ‘School Boundary Review Process’ (Policy I-29) for the Advisory Committee, attached as Appendix A.

This meeting established the Advisory Committee’s objective to identify preferred school attendance boundary options.

This meeting also confirmed that these preferred attendance boundary options would be presented to the greater school communities at the upcoming Community Consultation Meeting on April 13th, 2015, scheduled for 7:00 p.m. at St. Ignatius of Loyola Catholic Secondary School. Online pre-registration is required, and can be completed on the Board’s public website: (http://www.hcdsb.org/Schools/BoundaryReviews/OakvilleSecondary/Pages/index.aspx)

The interim school attendance boundary options consider all Catholic secondary schools in Oakville and take into consideration the future accommodation needs of elementary students. The approved option will take effect for the 2016-2017 school year.

APPENDIX E

331

http://www.hcdsb.org/Schools/BoundaryReviews/OakvilleSecondary/Pages/index.aspx

of 5

As per School Boundary Review Policy I-29 (Appendix A), the following six criteria will be used in evaluating school attendance boundary options:

Optimizing the use of existing school facilities, while ensuring that pupils are accommodated to the extent possible, in permanent school facilities that are within their enrolment capacity;

Minimizing the use of portable classrooms whenever possible, except during the establishment phases of new communities and throughout the peak enrolment phases of schools;

To the extent possible, minimizing school boundary adjustments, thereby ensuring that said boundaries remain stable, over a minimal five-year period;

To the extent possible and in accordance with Board policy, optimize the cost-effective use of school transportation;

Ensuring that a cost- effective range of program delivery, responding to pupil needs, is achieved through the optimum distribution of school enrolment;

To the extent possible, give due consideration to the concept of a community of associated schools and where feasible, give consideration to a Catholic School community in which school boundaries will substantially match Catholic Parish boundaries.

The Oakville Catholic Secondary School Boundary Review Advisory Committee is comprised of the following school representatives: Holy Trinity Family of Schools Erin Bell Holy Trinity Catholic Secondary School Peter Longo Our Lady of Peace Catholic Elementary School Susan English St. Andrew Catholic Elementary School Janice Naylor St. John Catholic Elementary School Lyn Hartman St. Marguerite d’Youville Catholic Elementary School Robert Griesbach St. Michael Catholic Elementary School St. Ignatius of Loyola Family of Schools Diane Bello St. Ignatius of Loyola Catholic Secondary School Leanne Holland St. Bernadette Catholic Elementary School Heidi Flood St. Joan of Arc Catholic Elementary School Jeff Mamer St. John Paul II Catholic Elementary School Jason Tadros St. Matthew Catholic Elementary School St. Thomas Aquinas Family of Schools Michelle Cole-Henderson St. Thomas Aquinas Catholic Secondary School Kendra Paiement Holy Family Catholic Elementary School Carolyn Suter St. Dominic Catholic Elementary School Krista Leaver St. James Catholic Elementary School Dallas Nicholson St. Joseph Catholic Elementary School Loretta Perdue St. Luke Catholic Elementary School Robert Berlettano St. Mary Catholic Elementary School Fiorella Zarlenga St. Mary Catholic Elementary School Ryan Pimenta St. Vincent Catholic Elementary School

332

of 5

Board staff members will also sit on this Committee, they are; Toni Pinelli, Superintendent of Education, Camillo Cipriano, Superintendent of Education, Giacomo Corbacio, Superintendent of Facility Management Services, and Frederick Thibeault, Administrator, Planning Services. Superintendent Pinelli confirmed that she would act as the Chair of the SBRC.

School Principals from both the elementary and secondary schools in Oakville will assist at the upcoming Community Consultation Meeting.

The Advisory Committee members were instructed that decisions will be made on a consensus basis rather than a voting basis and that the Committee’s purpose is to provide a recommendation(s) to the Board. The Board will make the school boundary decision, which is anticipated for the June 16th, 2015 Regular Board Meeting. Delegations from the community will also be permitted at the aforementioned meeting.

The Advisory Committee members were asked to communicate the information with their respective School Councils in order to ensure that the School Councils are regularly updated regarding the discussions and progress of the school boundary review process. Community updates will be forwarded to parents through their home school which will include information on the school boundary review. This information will also be posted on the Board’s website for the wider community to access.

Minutes of the March 4, 2015 Oakville Catholic Secondary SBRC Meeting have been attached as Appendix B.

(Upcoming) April 13, 2015 – SBRC Community Consultation Meeting

The Advisory Committee agreed to present the four (4) school attendance area options to the community at the April 13, 2015 Community Consultation meeting to obtain input and comments.

Current Boundary

Current boundaries remain the same.

1. St. Thomas Aquinas Catholic Secondary School cannot accommodate any portables on site, and is nearing its built capacity

2. St. Thomas Aquinas Catholic Secondary School’s growing International Baccalaureate (IB) program will further accelerate growth pressures

3. Continued declining enrolment at Holy Trinity and St. Ignatius of Loyola Catholic Secondary Schools

4. North Oakville (North of Dundas) development has started to yield a significant number of students

5. Potential to re-distribute high enrolment growth across Oakville secondary schools, and reduce empty pupil places

The four (4) options to be discussed are described below:

333

of 5

Option 1

1. Redirect patch area V23 (North Oakville Secondary Plan) from St. Thomas Aquinas Catholic Secondary School towards Holy Trinity Catholic Secondary School; and,

2. Redirect St. Mary Catholic Elementary School (Patch areas P19, P27, P30, O18, O20, O21 & V24 - V23 is excluded) from St. Thomas Aquinas Catholic Secondary School toward St. Ignatius of Loyola Catholic Secondary School.

Option 2

1. Redirect Holy Family Catholic Elementary School (Patch areas V19 & V20) from St. Thomas Aquinas Catholic Secondary School towards Holy Trinity Catholic Secondary School;


3. Redirect St. Mary Catholic Elementary School (Patch areas P19, P27, P30, O18, O20, O21, & V24 - V23 is excluded) from St. Thomas Aquinas Catholic Secondary School toward St. Ignatius of Loyola Catholic Secondary School

Option 3


2. Redirect patch areas P30 & V24 from St. Thomas Aquinas Catholic Secondary School toward St. Ignatius of Loyola Catholic Secondary School PLEASE NOTE:

St. Mary Catholic Elementary School Grade 8 classes will be split between St. Thomas Aquinas Catholic Secondary School and St. Ignatius of Loyola Catholic Secondary School until the new North Oakville CES is opened, which is anticipated to be directed to St. Ignatius of Loyola Catholic Secondary School.

This option would also require that a second boundary review be undertaken in the next 5-6 years.

Option 4

1. Redirect Holy Family Catholic Elementary School (Patch areas V19 & V20) from St. Thomas Aquinas Catholic Secondary School towards Holy Trinity Catholic Secondary School;


3. Redirect patch areas P30 & V24 from St. Thomas Aquinas Catholic Secondary School toward St. Ignatius of Loyola Catholic Secondary School

334

of 5

PLEASE NOTE:

St. Mary Catholic Elementary School Grade 8 classes will be split between St. Thomas Aquinas Catholic Secondary School and St. Ignatius of Loyola Catholic Secondary School until the new North Oakville CES is opened, which is anticipated to be directed to St. Ignatius of Loyola Catholic Secondary School.

This option would also require that a second boundary review be undertaken in the next 5-6 years.

Upon review of the community feedback, a Final Report on the Oakville Secondary School Boundary Review including recommendations will be prepared and submitted to the Board at the June 2, 2015 Board Meeting. The community will have the opportunity to delegate to the Board regarding the Advisory Committee’s Final Report at the June 16, 2015 Board Meeting. It is anticipated that the Board will consider the Advisory Committee’s recommendations and any delegation information, and establish the new school attendance boundaries for Oakville Catholic Secondary Schools at the June 16, 2015 Regular Board Meeting. Changes to the Boundaries will take effect for the 2016-2017 school year. SBRC Milestone Dates

Completed: Board approves Oakville Secondary Schools Boundary Review Process February 17, 2015 Inaugural SBRC Meeting March 4, 2015 SBRC Interim Report Posted on Board Website April 2, 2015 Upcoming: Community Consultation Meeting at Loyola April 13, 2015 Community Comments & Feedback are due May 8, 2015 SBRC reviews Options & Community Input May 14, 2015 SBRC Final Report posted on website May 28, 2015 SBRC Final Report & Recommendations presented to the Board June 2, 2015 Board receives Delegations & approves new secondary school boundaries June 16, 2015

335

Georgetown Elementary Schools Boundary Review Update Page 1 of 2



GEORGETOWN ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS BOUNDARY REVIEW

UPDATE PURPOSE:

To update the Board on the already approved Georgetown Elementary Schools Boundary Review process and to advise that the timeline will be extended to December 2015.


1. Information Item 10.6, “Georgetown Elementary Schools Boundary Review”, from the January 20, 2015 Regular Board Meeting.

COMMENTS:

At the January 20, 2015 Regular Meeting of the Board, Senior Staff advised Trustees that due to continued accommodation pressures at the Georgetown Elementary Schools, namely in the south, a school attendance boundary review would be needed. As such, the review process began in February 2015.

Planning Services, using updated enrolment counts and forecasts, completed an analysis of the existing Georgetown Elementary School boundaries. From this, a number of options were developed to address growing enrolment pressures that were occurring in South Georgetown at St. Catherine of Alexandria and St. Brigid Catholic Elementary Schools (CES). Both schools have already surpassed their maximum built classroom capacity. St. Catherine of Alexandria is expected to surpass its portable classroom capacity by 2016. The options were developed taking into consideration either a new built Holy Cross CES or reliance on existing building capacity and the use of portable classrooms.

Enrolment pressure concerns were further exacerbated with the announcement on January 17, 2015 by the Town of Halton Hills that water allocations for commercial development would be re-directed to residential growth in the south.

More recently, a study was initiated Board wide to evaluate the Early French Immersion (EFI) program that was established in 2012. If changes are made to program offerings, it is anticipated that this would have a direct impact to the enrolment forecasts used to develop the options.

Given the uncertainties in the EFI program, as well as the continued uncertainty as to whether the Ministry will allocate funds in the next round of capital funding for a new Holy Cross CES facility, staff decided to re-evaluate its strategy moving forward and to postpone the original June 2015 approval date until December 2015 at the latest. This would be in time for 2016-2017 elementary registration opening in January 2016.

336

Georgetown Elementary Schools Boundary Review Update Page 2 of 2

CONCLUSION:

Given the uncertainties currently surrounding the Georgetown Elementary Schools Boundary Review, it would be preferable to postpone the Georgetown school boundary review recommendation to the Board until December 2015, and still be in time for the 2016-2017 elementary registration timelines. This would allow time for the EFI study recommendations to be provided, for the results of the next round of capital funding allocations, and would allow staff more time to review other options.

REPORT PREPARED & TIM OVERHOLT SUBMITTED BY: SUPERINTENDENT OF EDUCATION, SCHOOL SERVICES

LORRIE NAAR SUPERINTENDENT OF EDUCATION, SCHOOL SERVICES

GIACOMO CORBACIO SUPERINTENDENT OF FACILITIES SERVICES, FACILITY SERVICES FREDERICK THIBEAULT ADMINISTRATOR OF PLANNING SERVICES, BUSINESS SERVICES REPORT APPROVED BY: P. DAWSON DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION AND SECRETARY OF THE BOARD

337

April Aboriginal Education Awareness Month Page 1 of 2



APRIL IS ABORIGINAL EDUCATION AWARENESS MONTH AT HCDSB

PURPOSE:

To share information regarding activities during Aboriginal Education Awareness Month at the Halton Catholic District School Board.


Halton Catholic District School Board is committed to delivering equitable and inclusive programs and services that support achievement and engagement by addressing the shared histories, cultures, and perspectives of the First Nation, Métis, and Inuit peoples in Canada.

April is Aboriginal Education Awareness month in Halton Catholic District School Board.

Students of Notre Dame Catholic Secondary School have produced a CD of recorded statements and reflective questions to increase our awareness of Canada’s Indigenous people. One elementary and one secondary version have been created. These have been delivered to all HCDSB schools and can be played during morning announcements each day during April.

A website has been created as a resource for teachers that can be found at http://hcdsbnativepeoples.weebly.com/ for additional teaching support in April and beyond.

All our secondary schools will erect a set of “100 Years of Loss” banners for the month of April that will provide interesting facts on residential schools and the Canadian Government’s apology to First Nations, Métis and Inuit peoples.

Semester 2 Grade 10 history students will not only learn the impacts of the Indian Act and residential schools, but also visit the Mohawk Residential School and Woodland Cultural Centre in Ohsweken (near Brantford).

A Professional Development day is planned April 28, 2015 for our Senior Administration and Principals to visit the Mohawk Residential School to deepen our awareness and understanding of complex issues, challenges, contributions and successes of our Aboriginal population. Trustees are invited to attend.

Confirmed events thus far for Aboriginal Education Awareness month include:

- Grade 10 History students visit Residential School - Daily Announcements in all schools. - 100 Years of Loss banner displays in all secondary schools. - Four beading workshop with Metis Artisan Naomi Smith - A Featured FN Artisan at VAN 2010

Olympics - Welcome and smudging at St. Ignatius of Loyola Diversity Celebration - St. Mark’s to visit Mississauga of New Credit First Nation to begin dialogue of “Switching Places”

338

http://hcdsbnativepeoples.weebly.com/

April Aboriginal Education Awareness Month Page 2 of 2

- HCDSB PD with Maya Chacaby from OFIFC for Senior Staff Leaders to Woodland Cultural Centre and Mohawk Residential School

- Both HDSB and HCDSB will host a First Nation, Metis and Inuit Student Conference at Charles Sturt University

REMARKS:

All HCDSB students will learn about Aboriginal history, culture and issues.

All HCDSB teachers, trustees, administrators, parents and community members are invited to participate in any of the community events that honour the contributions and the legacy of our First Nation, Métis and Inuit people, past and present. For our non-Aboriginal students and staff, it is a time to dispel myths and misconceptions, create awareness of the historical factors which reflect the current realities of Aboriginal people, and to enhance intercultural understanding by providing culturally-accurate information from an Aboriginal prospective.

CONCLUSION:

Halton Catholic District School Board seeks to be a provincial leader in Aboriginal Education.

Aboriginal Education Awareness month gives us an opportunity to strengthen our relationships with our community partners and demonstrate how Catholic education contributes broadly to the entire Halton community. It is a continual goal of our schools and teachers to ensure that the diversity of our students is reflected in the curriculum, teaching and learning in our classrooms, as well as the experiences to which our students have access both inside our schools and beyond. We know that by doing this we increase student engagement, create a positive school climate, and give every student an opportunity to be successful.

HCDSB is very proud to be partnering with various community organizations as we demonstrate the unity and rich complexity within our school communities.

REPORT PREPARED BY: SHERRY SAEVIL, ABORIGINAL LIAISON REPORT SUBMITTED BY: JACK NIGRO, SUPERINTENDENT OF CURRICULUM APPROVED BY: P. DAWSON DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION AND SECRETARY OF THE BOARD

339

2015 AGM & CONFERENCE

RESOLUTIONS

340

Explanation of Committee Recommendations

& Resolution Session Procedures Resolution sessions will be conducted using “Robert’s Rules of Order” and the provisions of the OCSTA Constitution. The chairperson of the session will ensure compliance with their rules.

Explanation of Committee Recommendations

The Conference Committee will study the resolutions and offer recommendations on the best way to meet their intent. The recommendations and their implications are:

i. Approve The direction given in the “therefore be it resolved” section of the resolution will be carried out.

ii. Approve and refer to the .…. committee for appropriate implementation.

The resolution will be forwarded to the designated committee for implementation.

iii. Receive and refer to the ..... committee for study. The resolution will be forwarded to the designated committee for study. Following the study and receipt of the committee’s recommendation, the Board of Directors will determine whether or not the resolution will be implemented.

iv. Not approve

No action will be taken.

v. No recommendation The committee is not making any recommendation with respect to the resolution.

vi. No action required

The intent of the resolution has been met. No further action will be taken.

Resolution Session Procedures Delegates wishing to speak to a resolution must go to one of the floor microphones and state their name and the name of the board they represent. The mover of a resolution will have the opportunity to be the first and last to speak to that resolution. Other trustees may speak once to a resolution. The chairperson may declare a motion out of order giving the reasons for doing so. The chairperson’s decision may be challenged by a majority vote of those voting delegates present at the session when the vote is called. Voting will be by a show of hands. Delegates carrying proxies must have and show proper identification - i.e. proxy badge. Ballots will be provided in the event that a vote by ballot is called for. Note Re Quorum: A quorum for the transaction of business at any general meeting of Members shall consist

of not fewer than forty (40) individuals entitled to vote, present in person.

1 341

Grouped Resolutions

a. the chair of the session will ask for a mover and seconder to approve the grouping of various related resolutions.

b. the chair of the session will ask for movers and seconders for the committee recommendation for each

group.

c. delegates will vote on the committee recommendation for each group. Delegates may request that any resolution(s) be removed from a “group” to be handled individually. These will be addressed when the group from which they have been removed has been dealt with.

Resolutions Handled Individually These will include resolutions removed from the groups, resolutions for which the committee has not made any recommendation and resolutions from the floor. A. Resolutions with committee recommendations

1. The chair of the session will announce the resolution number and the name of the sponsoring board:

the chair will call for the sponsoring board to move and second the committee recommendation; delegates will speak to the committee recommendation; delegates will vote on the committee recommendation.

2. If the sponsoring board does not move the committee recommendation from the floor:

the chair will call for the sponsoring board to move their original resolution; delegates will speak to the resolution; delegates will vote on the resolution.

3. If the original resolution is not moved by the sponsoring board, the resolution will be withdrawn. B. Resolutions without committee recommendations

1. These resolutions will be handled as follows:

the chair will call for the sponsoring board to move their original resolution; delegates will speak to the resolution; delegates will vote on the resolution.

2. If the original resolution is not moved by the sponsoring board, the resolution will be withdrawn.

2 342

C. Amendments from the Floor

Amendments made on the floor relate to the “therefore be it resolved” section of the resolution and must be written out and handed to the chairperson. The chairperson will consider the amendment and, if necessary, discuss it with the parliamentarian or others to ensure that it is clearly understood.

the chair will read the amendment; delegates will speak to the amendment; delegates will vote on the amendment; delegates will vote on the resolution as amended.

If the amendment is defeated:

delegates will be asked to speak to the original resolution; delegates will vote on the original resolution.

D. Resolutions Presented from the Floor

After resolutions presented by the committee have been dealt with, other resolutions may be presented from the floor. The following rules apply:

2/3 of the voting delegates present at the session must consent to consider the resolution; sufficient copies of the resolution (and background material) must be provided for all those present

at the resolution session; these resolutions will be handled as outlined above.

The provincial office will distribute, in the delegate kits, resolutions to be presented from the floor provided a minimum of 225 copies of each resolution (and background material, if applicable) are received in the Provincial Office by April 10, 2015.

L:\USR\Group\AGM, Seminars & Regional Meetings\2015 AGM & Conference - Sheraton Toronto Airport Hotel\Resolutions\Reslutions package.doc

3 343

APPROVE

RESOLUTIONS # 1-6

MOTION TO DEAL WITH RESOLUTIONS IN GROUPS MOVED BY: ______________________________________________________ SECONDED BY: ______________________________________________________ THAT: the grouping of the Resolutions be approved. MOVED BY: ______________________________________________________ SECONDED BY: ______________________________________________________ THAT: the committee recommendation for Resolutions 1-6 be

approved.

344

OCSTA RESOLUTION 1-15

Moved by: Sharon Hobin Dufferin-Peel Catholic District School Board Seconded by: Esther O’Toole Topic: Programs and Services for Students with Differing Abilities Including Diverse

Learning Needs (e.g. – Mental Well-Being and Mental Health challenges)

Whereas: the changing framework for Special Education and Support Services is internationally and provincially aligned with the Ministry’s mandate to promote success for all students with differing abilities including students with diverse learning needs ; and

Whereas: the principles of the draft Ministry resources Learning for All: K-12, the aligned

Inter-Ministerial Provincial Transition Framework and commitments to supporting successful transitions for all students (PPM 156) are founded on beliefs that all students can succeed and that student well-being, achievement, student voice and engagement need to be supported in an inclusive learning environment; and

Whereas: boards continue to be challenged in their design effective school and system

improvement plans when funding and other pressures may arise in delivering a Ministry mandated criterion-referenced curriculum with related expected practices while adhering to a universal design for learning approach which honours success for all through personalized instruction; and

Whereas: building capacity of staff through professional learning in support of all diverse

learners is critical to student well-being and student achievement; recognizing the need to have adequate time for consolidation and practice of new learning as relates to mental well-being and mental health; and

Whereas: the Ministry of Education, Ministry of Child and Youth Services and Ministry of

Health mental well-being strategy will need sustainable commitments to keep pace with growth communities and to respond to changing needs and societal demands in equitable and transparent ways.

Therefore Be It Resolved That: OCSTA petition the Ministry of Education to review on-going equitable and sustainable funding for all including for students facing mental health challenges. In addition, to request a review of other commitments including aligned supports for student well-being, voice, achievement, and engagement for all learners with differing abilities. OCSTA petition the Ministry of Education to continue to address the changing nature of student needs including needs identified through a variety of student transitions as evidenced in the need for on-going enhanced prevention/intervention supports for students with mental health challenges. Committee Recommendation Approve.

345


Moved by: Leslie Cassidy-Amadio Huron-Superior Catholic District School Board Seconded by: Lindsay Liske

Topic: Funding Gap Between Ministry Construction Benchmarks and Actual Cost of Construction

Whereas: the Ministry of Education funds school capital construction costs; and

Whereas: the Ministry has established construction benchmarks with geographical adjustments; and

Whereas: construction costs significantly exceed the Ministry of Education construction benchmarks; and

Whereas: an inequity exists in Northern Ontario in terms of being able to construct schools with equivalent sizes, populations or amenities, as similar projects in Southern Ontario due to the benchmark construction cost gap.

Therefore be it Resolved That:

OCSTA petition the Ministry of Education to review the construction benchmarks in Northern Ontario to adequately reflect the higher construction costs. Committee Recommendation Approve.

346


Moved by: Paul Landry Kenora Catholic District School Board Seconded by: Vaughn Blab Topic: Cost of Travel for Trustees from Northern Ontario ____________________________________________________________________________

Whereas: school boards are allocated funding through the Grants for Student Needs to accommodate all trustee expenditures; and

Whereas: school boards are required to top up the trustee allocation to accommodate trustee

travel to meetings and conferences in different areas of the Province; and

Whereas: the cost to travel to meetings and conferences which are normally held in Toronto is significantly higher for Northern Ontario than travel from other areas of Ontario. The estimated cost for one trustee to travel to Toronto is $1,400 from Kenora via Winnipeg, Manitoba.

Therefore be it Resolved That: The Ontario Catholic School Trustees Association petition the Ministry of Education to review the Grants for Student Needs allocation for trustees and revise it to reflect the cost of travel for trustees from Northern Ontario. Committee Recommendation Approve.

347


Moved by: Connie Positano Simcoe Muskoka Catholic District School Board Seconded by: Catherine MacDonald Topic: Mental Health Whereas: research continues to state the need for services and supports for children and

adolescents affected with mental health and/or addictions; and Whereas: trustees have a responsibility to ensure student success and well-being; and Whereas: one in five students has been identified as having mental health issues; and Whereas: the Ministry has developed a ten year mental health strategy to support children

and adolescents; and Whereas: some Boards are faced with large geographic jurisdictions to provide this support. Therefore be it Resolved That: OSCTA encourages the Ministry of Education to increase funds to provide an increased level of supports and services to students. Committee Recommendation Approve.

348


Moved by: Catherine MacDonald Simcoe Muskoka Catholic District School Board (on behalf of Student Trustee Quinn Scarlett) Seconded by: Connie Positano Topic: Student Mental Health – Transition to Secondary Whereas: the Ministry of Education, Ministry of Child and Youth Services and Ministry of

Health mental well-being strategy will need sustainable commitments to keep pace with growth communities and to respond to changing needs and societal demands in equitable and transparent ways [Excerpt from WCDSB Resolution 2014]; and

Whereas: the transition between elementary school and secondary school causes a high

level of stress and anxiety amongst students, and can further lead to mental health problems.

Therefore be it Resolved That: OCSTA petition the Ministry to put more focus towards transitional counseling and mental health aid for elementary students. Committee Recommendation Approve.

349


Moved by: Marline Ilijow Superior North Catholic District School Board Seconded by: Judy Wawia Topic: Charter FNMI Education Whereas: the Charter is consistent with the goals of our Catholic Graduate Expectations and

the doctrine of the Catholic Church and; Whereas: the Charter helps to deepen our understanding and commitment to Aboriginal

education and; Whereas: the Charter is fully supported by OCSTA’s First Nations Trustees Advisory

Council; Therefore be it Resolved That: OCSTA adopt the Charter of Commitment for First Nation, Métis and Inuit education and that the Charter be recommended to the Canadian Catholic School Trustees’ Association for adoption as a National Charter of Commitment. Committee Recommendation Approve. (copy of Charter of Commitment attached)

350

1

Charter of Commitment

First Nation, Métis and Inuit Education This document has been drafted for consideration for adoption by the Ontario Catholic School Trustees’ Association and for recommendation to the Canadian Catholic School Trustees’ Association as a National Charter of Commitment.

The development of this Charter is guided by:

• The Canadian Constitution Act, 1982 • The United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP),

September, 2007 • Ontario’s First Nation, Métis and Inuit Education Policy Framework (2007) • It’s our Vision, It’s Our Time – First Nations Control of First Nations Education,

Assembly of First Nations, July 2010 • The Accord on Indigenous Education, Association of Canadian Deans of

Education, 2010 • The Ontario Catholic School Graduate Expectations, Institute for Catholic

Education – Second Edition 2011 (Key provisions of these documents are set out in the Appendix)

Intent

The intent of the Charter is to articulate the support by school boards for

• First Nation, Métis and Inuit knowledge systems and learning models; • The central value of culture, language and knowledge of history in contributing to

the well-being of First Nation, Métis and Inuit students, families and communities; • A holistic approach that addresses spiritual, emotional, physical and intellectual

development in relation to oneself, family, community and environment; • Ensuring that there is a mechanism for school boards to periodically report on

their progress towards achieving the goals of the Charter.

Vision

First Nation, Métis and Inuit identities, cultures, languages, values, ways of knowing, and knowledge systems will flourish in all Ontario schools.

Principles

This Charter of Commitment:

• Supports a socially just society for First Nation, Métis and Inuit peoples • Reflects a respectful, collaborative, and consultative process among First Nation,

Métis and Inuit knowledge holders and knowledge holders in the general education community

• Promotes partnerships among schools, school boards and First Nation, Métis and Inuit communities

ATTACHMENT FOR RESOLUTION #6-15

351

2

Values the diversity of First Nation, Métis and Inuit knowledges and ways of knowing and learning.

Goals The Ontario Public School Boards’ Association on behalf of member school boards will collaborate with education partners in Ontario to support, endorse and foster the following goals: Respectful and Welcoming Learning Environments

Support all school and board staff in creating learning environments that instill a sense of belonging for all learners in Ontario and that are more accepting, respectful, welcoming and supportive of First Nation, Métis and Inuit learners.

Promote strategies that encourage First Nation, Métis and Inuit students to participate in the full range of school activities including recreation and leadership roles.

Foster initiatives that provide students with positive transition experiences in moving from First Nation communities to provincially funded schools.

Promote respectful and welcoming environments so that all schools are positioned to encourage involvement of families of First Nation, Métis and Inuit students and of community members.

Respectful and Inclusive Curriculum and Classroom Programs

Actively identify opportunities to integrate First Nation, Métis and Inuit histories, cultures and perspectives in delivery of curriculum in the classroom across the full spectrum of subjects and from K-12.

Consult with Elders and other First Nation, Métis and Inuit experts in traditional knowledge, cultures, and histories to bring relevant local perspectives to instruction planning.

Promote shared planning with First Nation, Métis and Inuit families in student transitions, student supports and curriculum resources and include these measures in Education Services Agreements between First Nation communities and school boards.

Share successful initiatives of integration of First Nation, Métis and Inuit histories, cultures and perspectives among school boards and with the Ministry to support continuous improvement in curriculum and program planning that incorporates First Nation, Métis and Inuit content.

Culturally Responsive Pedagogy

Advocate for teacher education programs that include courses on First Nation, Métis and Inuit cultures, histories and perspectives and that prepare teachers to incorporate these areas of knowledge across their teaching practice.

Provide professional development within school boards that offers teachers opportunities to improve their knowledge, understanding and skills in relation to


352

3

First Nation, Métis and Inuit cultures, histories, perspectives, learning models and learning styles.

Involve Elders and others with expertise in local First Nation, Métis and Inuit communities in supporting teachers to incorporate First Nation, Métis and Inuit content in their program delivery in accurate, culturally sensitive and appropriate ways

Valuing First Nation, Métis and Inuit expertise

Partner with First Nation, Métis and Inuit organizations and learning institutions to engage their expertise in appropriate ways to incorporate First Nation, Métis and Inuit cultures, histories and perspectives in school programs.

Consult with First Nation, Métis and Inuit organizations and learning institutions Culturally responsive assessment

Promote assessment practices that actively support achievement of First Nation, Métis and Inuit students through acknowledgement of a range of learning models and learning styles.

Promote the elimination of cultural and other forms of bias in student assessment.

Affirming, revitalizing the languages of Canada’s First Peoples

Recognize the central role of language in supporting identity and culture and in validating First Nation, Métis and Inuit world views.

Be proactive in promoting indigenous languages in schools, including consideration of language immersion programs.

Promote the development of resources in First Nation, Métis and Inuit languages. First Nation, Métis and Inuit representation in staff and leadership

Promote voluntary confidential self-identification of First Nation, Métis and Inuit staff in school boards.

Encourage increased representation of First Nation, Métis and Inuit staff in boards through hiring and promotion practices.

Collaborate with universities and colleges, and with First Nation, Métis and Inuit communities, to improve access, transitional support and retention strategies to increase the numbers of First Nation, Métis and Inuit people enrolling in and completing secondary, post-secondary, teacher education and early childhood education programs.


353

4

Non-Aboriginal learners – foster commitment to First Nation, Métis and Inuit education

Promote curriculum that ensures grade-appropriate instruction across the curriculum related to First Nation, Métis and Inuit cultures, histories, perspectives and contributions to both historical and contemporary Canada.

Encourage opportunities for all students to experience First Nation, Métis and Inuit cultures and the components of an inclusive and welcoming school environment.

Research

Create awareness of education research by First Nation, Métis and Inuit educators and researchers.

Partner with First Nation, Métis and Inuit communities at all levels in ethically based and respectful research processes.

August, 2013


354

1

APPENDIX A

Charter of Commitment First Nation, Métis and Inuit Education

REFERENCES

The Canadian Constitution Act, 1982

RIGHTS OF THE ABORIGINAL PEOPLES OF CANADA

35. (1) The existing aboriginal and treaty rights of the aboriginal peoples of Canada are hereby recognized and affirmed. (2) In this Act, "aboriginal peoples of Canada" includes the Indian, Inuit, and Metis peoples of Canada. (3) For greater certainty, in subsection (1) "treaty rights" includes rights that now exist by way of land claims agreements or may be so acquired. (4) Notwithstanding any other provision of this Act, the aboriginal and treaty rights referred to in subsection (1) are guaranteed equally to male and female persons. The United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP), September, 2007

Article 14: (1) Indigenous peoples have the right to establish and control their educational systems and institutions providing education in their own languages, in a manner appropriate to their cultural methods of teaching and learning. (2) Indigenous individuals, particularly children, have the right to all levels and forms of education of the State without discrimination. (3) States shall, in conjunction with indigenous peoples, take effective measures, in order for indigenous individuals, particularly children, including those living outside their communities, to have access, when possible to an education in their own culture and provided in their own language.

Ontario’s First Nation, Métis and Inuit Education Policy Framework (2007) Vision First Nation, Métis, and Inuit students in Ontario will have the knowledge, skills, and confidence they need to successfully complete their elementary and secondary education in order to pursue postsecondary education or training and/or to enter the workforce. They will have the traditional and contemporary knowledge, skills, and attitudes required to be socially contributive, politically active, and economically prosperous citizens of the world. All students in Ontario will have knowledge and appreciation of contemporary and traditional First Nation, Métis, and Inuit traditions, cultures, and perspectives.


355

2

It’s Our Vision, It’s Our Time – First Nations Control of First Nations Education, Assembly of First Nations, July 2010 “The purpose of the policy framework presented in this paper is to reaffirm the First Nations’ vision of lifelong learning presented in the ICIE 1972 policy* and reassert First Nations inherent Aboriginal and Treaty rights to education. This policy framework provides strategic recommendations that will enable the development and implementation of education legislation, governance frameworks, policies, programs and services for all levels of education for First Nations learners at all stages of lifelong learning. Key elements of First Nations’ lifelong learning addressed in this paper include language immersion, holistic and culturally relevant curricula, well-trained educators, focused leadership, parental involvement and accountability, and safe and healthy facilities founded on principles that respect First Nations jurisdiction over education.” “All peoples have the right to maintain their cultural and linguistic identities, and education is essential to actualizing this right. First Nations control over education will provide the means to acquire the necessary skills to be self-empowered and self-sufficient and to maintain First Nations cultural values and languages. This is essential to actualizing an individual’s success in society. It will also provide a strong foundation for empowering proud First Nations peoples who are fully able to contribute to the development of their families, clans, communities and nations.” * STATEMENT OF VALUES (ICIE 1972 Policy) “We want education to provide the setting in which our children can develop the fundamental attitudes and values which have an honored place in Indian tradition and culture. The values that we want to pass on to our children, values which make our people a great race, are not written in any book. They are found in our history, in our legends and in the culture. We believe that if an Indian child is fully aware of the important Indian values he will have reason to be proud of our race and of himself as an Indian. We want the behavior of our children to be shaped by those values which are most esteemed in our culture. When our children come to school, they have already developed certain attitudes and habits that are based on experiences in the family. School programs that are influenced by these values respect cultural priority and are an extension of the education which parents give children from their first years. These early lessons emphasize attitudes of: - self-reliance, - respect for personal freedom, - generosity, - respect for nature, and - wisdom. All of these have a special place in the Indian way of life. While these values can be understood and interpreted in different ways by different cultures, it is very important that


356

3

Indian children have a chance to develop a value system which is compatible with Indian culture. The gap between our people and those who have chosen, often gladly, to join us as residents of this beautiful and bountiful country, is vast when it comes to mutual understanding and appreciation of differences. To overcome this, it is essential that Canadian children of every racial origin have the opportunity during their school days to learn about the history, customs and culture of this country's original inhabitants and first citizens. We propose that education authorities, especially those in Ministries of Education, should provide for this in the curricula and texts which are chosen for use in Canadian schools.” (From: National Indian Brotherhood/Assembly of First Nations, Indian Control of Indian Education: Policy Paper, 1972) The Accord on Indigenous Education, Association of Canadian Deans of Education, 2010 Establishing mechanisms and priorities for increased Indigenous educational engagement, establishing partnerships with Indigenous organizations and communities, and using educational frameworks based on Indigenous knowledge are trends that have important implications for the Association of Canadian Deans of Education (ACDE). New ways of engagement are required in order to address these trends. The time is right for a concerted and cooperative effort that creates transformational education by rejecting the “status quo,” moving beyond “closing the gap” discourse, and contributing to the well-being of Indigenous peoples and their communities. At the same time, ACDE recognizes that it has a role and responsibility to expand educators’ knowledge about and understanding of Indigenous education. The processes of colonization have either outlawed or suppressed Indigenous knowledge systems, especially language and culture, and have contributed significantly to the low levels of educational attainment and high rates of social issues such as suicide, incarceration, unemployment, and family or community separation. In secondary schooling, for instance, 2006 graduation rates are still below 50 percent nationally for Aboriginal students and only 8 percent for university degree attainment, in contrast to the 14 percent Canadian average for persons over 15 years of age. In response, Indigenous people and their organizations and communities have become more involved in decision-making and policy development in order to improve all levels of education. Major national studies and government commissions have called for this type of political and educational involvement, and have recommended that Indigenous knowledge systems have a central position in educational policy, curriculum, and pedagogy, in order to make significant improvements to Indigenous education.2 Individual and collective efforts to make such improvements are being enacted in local, regional, provincial, and national contexts. ACDE joins these efforts through its member faculties, schools, colleges, and departments of education across Canada. As a national organization, ACDE supports and encourages increased national dialogue and cooperative action for improving Indigenous education.


357

4

Ontario Catholic School Graduate Expectations, 2nd Edition (2011), Institute for Catholic Education In 1998, the first edition of the Ontario Catholic School Graduate Expectations was released within the Catholic education community. Immediately, the Expectations were used as a framework for designing Ontario Catholic curriculum, in the development of youth leadership, teacher education and administrative programs and to support the work of local board initiatives. Now in 2011, the second edition of the Ontario Catholic School Graduate Expectations has been released. After extensive consultation within the Catholic community the seven overall and fifty-two specific expectations have been validated and remain unchanged. The Institute for Catholic Education invites all stakeholders to continue to embrace and use the Ontario Catholic School Graduate Expectations to guide their programming and work in Catholic education. The seven overall expectations are: 1. A Discerning Believer Formed in the Catholic Faith Community 2. An Effective Communicator 3. A Reflective, Creative and Holistic Thinker 4. A Self-Directed, Responsible, Lifelong Learner 5. A Collaborative Contributor 6. A Caring Family Member 7. A Responsible Citizen


358

APPROVE & REFER

RESOLUTIONS # 7-10

359


Moved by: Ann Andrachuk Toronto Catholic District School Board

Seconded by: Nancy Crawford

Topic: Amendment/Revision to Federal Short Form Census Form _____________________________________________________________________________

Whereas: the Federal Government Order in Council of June 2010 eliminated the use of the Long Form Census form which removed detailed enumeration information; and

Whereas: elimination of detailed information, specifically religious identification, challenges Ontario’s four government-funded education systems to determine their base of support; and

Whereas: religious affiliation is required to inform elected representation.


OCSTA through the appropriate avenues, Provincial and Federal, request an amendment to the Federal Short Form Census Form to include a required category for religious identification. Committee Recommendation Approve and refer to Legislation & Finance Committee.

360


Moved by: Sharon Hobin Dufferin-Peel Catholic District School Board Seconded by: Anna da Silva Topic: Funding Formula Reform – School Board Administration and Governance

Grant Reduction

Whereas: the Ministry has implemented a new funding model for the School Board Administration and Governance Grant based on the advice of the School Board Administration and Governance Advisory Group (BAAG); and

Whereas: the new funding model has a redistributive funding effect on school boards which

has impacted the Greater Toronto Area (GTA) boards disproportionately; and Whereas: the new funding model based on ten core functions is not reflective of the

administrative requirements of large, urban boards and benefits much small boards overall; and

Whereas: the four year phase-in implementation has already started with the 2014-15 year;

and Whereas: the significant funding reduction to the School Board Administration and

Governance Grant has a direct impact on the administrative capabilities of the board as well as a direct impact on the classroom;

Therefore be it Resolved That: OCSTA petition the Ministry of Education to review the recommendations from BAAG and the redistributive impacts of the funding on boards, with a view to recognizing the administrative and governance requirements of large boards and maintaining funding at current levels in this area. Committee Recommendation Approve and refer to Legislation & Finance Committee.

361


Moved by: Connie Positano Simcoe Muskoka Catholic District School Board Seconded by: Catherine MacDonald Topic: Catholic Support Whereas: the method of indicating your intention to support the Catholic Separate School

System is ambiguous; and Whereas: the method that allows you to vote for a Catholic Separate School Trustee during

a Municipal election is confusing; and Whereas: in some municipalities, Catholic Trustees are not geographically represented on

the ballot. Therefore be it Resolved That: Approach the Government of Ontario and the Canada Law Society to change the existing default of educational support to the public system to be an intentional choice when property purchase agreements are being signed; and Therefore be it Resolved That: OCSTA, along with local school Boards, develop a plan to amplify and clarify the extreme importance of identifying Catholic Separate School supporters. Committee Recommendation Approve and refer to Legislation & Finance Committee.

362


Moved by: Lisa Soulliere Windsor-Essex Catholic District School Board Seconded by: Barbara Holland Topic: Supervision of a School Board Whereas: the Education Act provides for the Minister to supervise a Board under certain

circumstances; and Whereas: the Education Act provides for the protection of denominational, linguistic and

cultural issues while under supervision; and Whereas: the Municipal Elections Act requires the election of School Board Trustees to

provide local representation regarding education; and Whereas: the Act contains certain sections which give powers to the Minister that challenge

the principles of democracy; and Whereas: the rights of electors to local representation and the right of the Minister to

suspend the right of local representation by a School Board should be conscientiously considered with every opportunity of procedural fairness and justice applied.

Therefore be it Resolved That: OCSTA examine the sections of the Education Act that pertain to supervision and that they provide findings to address the protection of denominational rights and procedural fairness to the Minister on behalf of member Boards. Committee Recommendation Approve and refer to Legislation & Finance Committee.

363

RECEIVE & REFER

RESOLUTIONS # 11-20

364


Moved by: Frank D’Amico Toronto Catholic District School Board

Seconded by: Nancy Crawford

Topic: Clergy Appreciation ____________________________________________________________________________

Whereas: Catholic Graduate Expectations state “A discerning believer formed in the Catholic faith community who celebrates the signs and sacred mysteries of God’s presence through word, sacrament, prayer, forgiveness, reflection and moral living;” and

Whereas: our Church is central to our identity and being in the Body of Christ, and provides the source of direction in the education of all Catholic students; and

Whereas: the leaders of our Church, our Bishops and Priests, are integral to support our families and students on their faith journey through the Eucharist and sacraments; and

Whereas: pastors go about quietly and largely unnoticed as they shepherd their flock.


OCSTA encourage local boards to recognize their clergy to celebrate and honour their commitment to our families, schools, staff, students and trustees in support of Catholic Education. Committee Recommendation Receive and refer to Catholic Education Committee.

365


Moved by: Lisa Soulliere Windsor-Essex Catholic District School Board

Seconded by: Frank DiTomasso

Topic: OCSTA Professional Development by Electronic Means Whereas: OCSTA provides professional development for the benefit of Trustees on a

regular on-going basis; and Whereas: all Trustees may not be able to attend every OCSTA conference or professional

development session in person;

Whereas: advancements in technology have made it easier and more affordable to provide for electronic delivery of professional development.


OCSTA establish a committee to study, evaluate and propose changes that would complement the current method of personal attendance to also include a consistent method of electronic delivery of professional development to ensure all Trustees have access to the professional development being offered by the association; and

That OCSTA establish a deadline for implementation of a consistent electronic delivery model for professional development by January 1, 2016.

Committee Recommendation Receive and refer to Conference Committee.

366


Moved by: Luz del Rosario Dufferin-Peel Catholic District School Board Seconded by: Thomas Thomas Topic: Ontario Regulation 274/12 – Hiring Practices

Whereas: Regulation 274 has been imposed upon school boards with regards to hiring practices; and

Whereas: Regulation 274 stipulates that occasional teachers be ranked in terms of seniority

and placed on a roster; and Whereas: Regulation 274 outlines a prescribed process and timeline for the posting of

available teaching positions. Therefore be it Resolved That: OCSTA petition the Ministry of Education to review Regulation 274 – Hiring Practices, with a view to reducing its administrative impact on school boards and to support the hiring of teachers which is timely and effective. Committee Recommendation Receive and refer to Labour Relations Committee.

367


Moved by: John Caputo Huron-Superior Catholic District School Board Seconded by: Kathleen Rosilius

Topic: Support for Boards to Address High Rates of Employee Absenteeism

Whereas: in 2012, MOUs were established removing the banks of sick days in collective agreements; and

Whereas: employee groups such as educational assistants and other support staff are demonstrating increasingly higher sick leave usage; and

Whereas: increases in sick leave are causing large expenditure increases which are pressing Board Budgets.


OCSTA petition the Ministry of Education to review the increased cost effects of this change in sick leave provisions, and to assist Boards in building capacity with implementing successful attendance management/support plans. Committee Recommendation Receive and refer to Labour Relations Committee.

368


Moved by: Rick Petrella Brant Haldimand Norfolk Catholic District School Board

Seconded by: Cliff Casey

Topic: Region Designation ______________________________________________________________________________

Step 1 – By Law Amendment Whereas: the current OCSTA By-laws only allow for amendment of the boundaries of the

regions when it is required as a result of student enrolment as stipulated in Article 6.1;

Whereas: the Board is seeking to expand the circumstances in which the boundaries of regions can be amended to better address the needs of Catholic District School Boards; Therefore be it Resolved That: The current By-laws be amended by adding a new Article 6.5 which states: 6.5 In addition to Article 6.4 above, region boundaries may also be altered, by Ordinary Resolution, for reasons other than those necessitated by Article 6, as long as the alteration is in the best interests of Catholic Education in Ontario and the constituent member Boards proposed to be in the same region share common religious, educational, geographic and economic characteristics. Step 2 – Change from Region 4 to 11 Whereas: the Brant Haldimand Norfolk Catholic District School Board is currently in Region 4; Whereas: the Trustees of the Brant Haldimand Norfolk Catholic District School Board wish to join Region 11; Whereas: the rationale for the request for the change in Region is based on the following reasons:

• the Brant Haldimand Norfolk Catholic District School Board shares common geography with Hamilton and Niagara, its district bordering them both;

• the Brant Haldimand Norfolk Catholic District School Board also belongs to

both the Diocese of Hamilton and the Diocese of St. Catharines (Niagara);

• the Brant Haldimand Norfolk Catholic District School Board also shares economic, religious and demographic interests more closely with Region 11 boards; in particular, many of its constituents work in the greater Hamilton and Niagara areas; in addition to these economic and religious interests, many of its staff live in the Hamilton and Niagara areas while commuting to its district for employment;

369


• some of its students (from the Haldimand area) attend secondary school in Niagara district after they graduate from Grade 8;

• the Brant Haldimand Norfolk Catholic District School Board recognizes that

realignment may be resisted if it resulted in a reallocation of the number of regional directors that sit on the Board of Directors; however, this requested realignment will not result in any change to the number of directors for either Region 4 or Region 11 and accordingly there would be no impact on the current composition of the Board of Directors;

• finally, the Brant Haldimand Norfolk Catholic District School Board states that

this change in Region currently accords with the enrolment criteria set out in Article 6;


The Brant Haldimand Norfolk Catholic District School Board be included in Region 11 instead of Region 4. Committee Recommendation Receive and refer to Legislation & Finance Committee. Rationale: The current OCSTA By Laws are not structured to provide for a discretionary change to the composition of regions. Therefore, the recommendation is to allow the Legislation and Finance Committee to review. The recommendation for the necessary changes would come from the OCSTA Board of Directors to the 2016 Annual General Meeting. This will allow the Board of Directors to review the change along with the Letters Patent of OCSTA. If the necessary changes to the By Laws are approved, they would govern voting at the 2017 AGM.

370


Moved by: Catherine MacDonald Simcoe Muskoka Catholic District School Board Seconded by: Shawn Cooper Topic: Educational Assistant Funding Whereas: the Growing Success document directs an inclusionary model of education; and Whereas: inclusion is an expensive educational model. Therefore be it Resolved That: OCSTA petition the Ministry of Education to provide appropriate funding for educational assistants to support the achievement and well-being of our students and staff. Committee Recommendation Receive and refer to Legislation & Finance Committee.

371


Moved by: Cathy Bowen Northwest Catholic District School Board Seconded by: Kathy Bryck Topic: Equity for Transportation Service for students within Catholic District

School Boards Whereas: in accordance with Section 190 of the Education Act, a board may provide for

transportation to and from the school that a pupil attends; and

Whereas: boards endeavor to provide safe, equitable, consistent and cost-effective transportation in accordance with those acts and regulations; and

Whereas: boards are working to address unique and challenging local conditions; and

Whereas: the geographic realities of some regions of the province requires that some students receive transportation service that is inequitable, including significantly long ride times, because the population distribution is very different across the province; and

Whereas: the option of addressing significantly long ride times is not available under the current funding model.

Therefore be it Resolved That: OCSTA petition the Ministry of Education to create conditions where there is equity for transportation service in Catholic District School Boards to meet the needs of pupils who are provided transportation service. Committee Recommendation Receive and refer to Legislation & Finance Committee.

372


Moved by: John Curry Ottawa Catholic School Board Seconded by: Kathy Ablett Topic: Municipal Election Voting

Whereas: school board trustees are elected in municipal elections; and Whereas: voter turnout in municipal elections is well below 50 percent in virtually all

municipalities; and Whereas: voter turnout is essential to a properly functioning democracy; and Whereas: the introduction of more widespread voting procedures would provide more

opportunities for voting and undoubtedly increase voter turnout. Therefore be it Resolved That: The Ontario Catholic School Trustees Association make presentations to the provincial government to ensure that alternative ways of casting a ballot in a municipal election are available to all voters in the province including voting by telephone, by mail and online. Committee Recommendation Receive and refer to Legislation & Finance Committee.

373


Moved by: Barbara Holland Windsor-Essex Catholic District School Board

Seconded by: Susan Tope

Topic: Election of Catholic Trustees

Whereas: the Education Act provides that a candidate is qualified for the office of Catholic Trustee if they are Roman Catholic; and

Whereas: Section 16 of the Assessment Act provides the process for the identification of those qualified as candidates for the position of Catholic Trustee; and

Whereas: the Municipal Elections Act establishes the duties and responsibilities of the Clerk in conducting municipal elections including the certification of candidates for the position of Catholic Trustee.


Prior to the 2018 municipal election, OCSTA develop a document that provides direction to the Clerks of municipalities in the Province of Ontario regarding their responsibilities in certifying candidates for the office of Catholic Trustee as established by the Education Act, the Assessment Act and the Municipal Elections Act.

Committee Recommendation Receive and refer to Legislation & Finance Committee.

374


Moved by: Lisa Soulliere Windsor-Essex Catholic District School Board


Topic: OCSTA Independent Structural and Operational Review

Whereas: the Ministry of Education is formally recognizing OCSTA as the bargaining agent

for Catholic School Boards in Ontario resulting in a significant change in the role of the organization and a shift in authority from local Catholic boards to OCSTA; and

Whereas: there is no financial or operational issue more significant to the delivery of education at the local level than employee contracts; and

Whereas: the Ministry of Education continues to view OCSTA as the political lobbying voice for Catholic education across the Province of Ontario; and

Whereas: there is no issue more important politically to Catholic education than the on-going threat to the continuation of Catholic Education in the Province of Ontario.


OCSTA establish as its two strategic priorities:

1) On-going political lobbying to ensure the continuation of Catholic Education in the Province of Ontario; and

2) Effective professional contract negotiations.

OCSTA engage external professional experts in organizational efficiency and effectiveness to review and recommend changes to the organizational structure, operations, policies, procedures and practices in light of these two strategic priorities; and

OCSTA request as part of the recommendations, appropriate organizational charts including lines of authority within the organization, new job descriptions for key positions, qualifications for each position and current market rate salary recommendations for each position; and

OCSTA request as part of the recommendations, appropriate structure and roles for Trustees within the organization to reflect the Trustee governance role and respect the role of all Trustees as elected local representatives.

Committee Recommendation Receive and refer to Office Management Committee.

375

TO BE CONSIDERED INDIVIDUALLY

RESOLUTIONS # 21-24

376


Moved by: Catherine MacDonald Simcoe Muskoka Catholic District School Board Seconded by: Connie Positano Topic: School, Church Whereas: Catholic schools are an integral part of the Church’s mission to evangelize youth;

and

Whereas: an OCSTA staff committee, with the title Pontifex Committee, have been discussing the nature of the relationships between Pastors and Principals with a view to publish best practices; and

Whereas: Cardinal Collins in a letter to the Parishes spoke eloquently about Catholic

trustees having the opportunity to campaign after masses Whereas: in the Archdiocese of Peterborough candidates were not allowed to take

advantage of introducing themselves to the parishioners; and Whereas: engagement between parishes and schools is variable and needs to be

strengthened; and

Whereas: a relationship is of critical importance for the schools and parishes; and

Whereas: the sacramental preparation in our schools is at the discretion of the parish priest; and

Whereas: some of our students are denied the opportunity to make their sacraments. Therefore be it Resolved That: OCSTA create forums for discussion to develop common goals in accepting our students into the Church without judgment or prejudice. Committee Recommendation Not approve. Rationale: The Committee is of the view that the issue of accepting students into the Church is a diocesan matter and not within the jurisdiction of OCSTA.

377


Moved by: Connie Positano Simcoe Muskoka Catholic District School Board Seconded by: Catherine MacDonald Topic: E-Cigarettes Whereas: despite their illegality, electronic cigarettes with nicotine are readily available for

purchase in Canada online and at retail, with little federal enforcement of the current regulations; and

Whereas: as a result of not being a “lit tobacco product”, electronic cigarettes are not subject to the restrictions of the 2006 Smoke-Free Ontario Act (SFOA) which prohibits smoking in public places, workplaces, on school and child-care properties, and near entrances to health care facilities, and prohibits sales to minors; and

Whereas: no formal safety requirements exist regarding product development, ingredient disclosure, nicotine levels, product safety, or packaging.(7,8) Electronic cigarettes are also not subject to the packaging, labeling, advertising, promotion, and sponsorship restrictions that apply to conventional tobacco cigarettes and other tobacco products. Electronic cigarettes are increasingly being marketed to youth and young adults through product flavouring, celebrity endorsements, event sponsorship, and free product offers.


The Ministry support advocating for the following changes: Electronic cigarettes should be prohibited anywhere smoking is currently prohibited, whether provincially or municipally mandated, including public places and workplaces to further protect the health needs of our children and youth. As well, two issues facing our youth today that fall out of the current legislative regulations are other tobacco products and electronic cigarettes.

a. Prohibit e-cigarette use wherever smoking is prohibited; b. Prohibit sales of flavoured e-cigarette products; c. Prohibit e-cigarette displays in retail stores; and d. Restrict sales of e-cigarettes to minors. e. Restrict sales of other tobacco products (smokeless, hookah, etc.)

Committee Recommendation Not approve.

Rationale: A new piece of legislation, namely Bill 45, was introduced in November 2014. It was being debated at Second Reading on March 25, 2015. A portion of this Bill deals with the same content as this resolution. Once passed into law, the new legislation will apply to E-Cigarettes.

378


Moved by: Mario Pascucci Dufferin-Peel Catholic District School Board

Seconded by: Shawn Xaviour Topic: Investigation of a New Method of Vote Allocation at the Annual General

Meeting of the Ontario Catholic School Trustees’ Association (OCSTA)

Whereas: the current management structure for the Ontario Catholic School Trustees’ Association (OCSTA) permits representation from each Ontario Catholic school board; and

Whereas: the current voting procedure at the Annual General Meeting permits one vote per trustee; and Whereas: the current OCSTA vote allocation is not reflective of the population that trustees

represent; Therefore be it Resolved That: OCSTA investigate a new method for vote allocation to each Board and/or Trustee for implementation at the 2015 Annual General Meeting, which considers representation reflective of population which trustees represent. Committee Recommendation Not approve. Rationale (see attachment) This topic was the subject of four different resolutions in 2013. Research was conducted into various models and other organizations were consulted. After significant analysis, it was determined that there was no merit in abandoning the existing model.

379

November 14, 2013 REPORT TO: Legislation & Finance Committee FROM: Kevin Kobus, Executive Director Bob Murray, Director, Legislative & Political Affairs SUBJECT: Weighted Voting Resolutions Introduction At the 2013 OCSTA AGM, 4 Resolutions were received and referred to the Legislation and Finance Committee pertaining to potential alterations to OCSTA’s decision-making and voting processes. 4 separate boards submitted resolutions, being Toronto, Dufferin-Peel, York and Brant-Haldimand-Norfolk, all requesting that the Association explore other models of voting and decision-making, including weighted voting models for both the general and special meetings of the entire membership and the OCSTA Board of Directors. This report aims to inform the committee of the staff’s findings related to weighted voting models and how they might impact OCSTA’s governance structure. In the conclusion of this report, there is a staff recommendation that is based on the research and consultation to date on these issues. The Resolutions The four resolutions attached were received and referred to the Legislation and Finance Committee at the 2013 OCSTA AGM by the general membership:

ATTACHMENT - RESOLUTIONS 23 & 24-15

380

Resolution #8-13 Moved By: Rick Petrella Brant Haldimand Norfolk Catholic District School Board Seconded By: Dennis Blake Topic: Representation on the OCSTA Board of Directors Whereas: the current management structure of OCSTA permits dual representation from larger Boards and single representation from a geographical collection of smaller boards based on a regional system. This structure can prevent smaller member boards from ever having representation on the OCSTA Board of Directors and, therefore, not having a voice within the organization or access to information in a timely fashion; and Whereas: the current voting allocation at OCSTA Annual General Meetings and resulting representation on the OCSTA Board of Directors is not reflective of the population that the Trustees represent. Therefore Be It Resolved That:

a) OCSTA investigates a new method for allocating votes at the Annual General Meetings to ensure equity amongst boards; and

b) OCSTA investigates a new method for determining representation on the Board of

Directors whereby consideration is given to the number of representatives on the Board, specifically the opportunity for every member board to have at least one representative on the Board of Directors; and

c) the new format be in effect for the 2014 AGM.

AGM Decision Receive and refer to Legislation & Finance Committee.


381

Resolution #9-13 Moved By: Mario Pascucci Dufferin-Peel Catholic District School Board Seconded By: Sharon Hobin Topic: Investigation of a New Method of Vote Allocation at the Annual General Meeting of the Ontario Catholic School Trustees’ Association (OCSTA) Whereas: the current management structure for the Ontario Catholic School Trustees’ Association (OCSTA) permits representation from each Ontario Catholic school board; and Whereas: the current voting procedure at the Annual General Meeting permits one vote per trustee; and Whereas: the current OCSTA vote allocation is not reflective of the population that trustees represent. Therefore Be It Resolved That: OCSTA investigate a new method for vote allocation to each Board and/or trustee for implementation at the 2014 Annual General Meeting, which considers representation reflective of population which trustees represent. AGM Decision Receive and refer to Legislation & Finance Committee.


382

Resolution #11-13 Moved By: Maria Rizzo Toronto Catholic District School Board Seconded By: Sal Piccininni Topic: Representation and Weighted Voting Board of Directors. Whereas: A new model for membership on the Board of Directors of OCSTA to allow all Catholic District School Boards to allow a minimum of one full voting member. A sliding scale should be developed and based on the student enrollment of Boards. Whereas: the current management structure of OCSTA permits dual representation from larger Boards, and single representation from a geographical collection of smaller boards based on a regional system. This structure prohibits some member boards from having equal representation on the Board of Directors and therefore excluding their voice within the organization; and Whereas: the current OCSTA vote allocation and corresponding representation on the Board of Directors is not reflective of the population that the Trustees represent. Therefore Be It Resolved That: OCSTA investigate a new method of vote allocation and individual board representation on the Board of Directors for implementation as soon as possible but no later than the 2014 OCSTA AGM. This new method will consider the number of representatives for each member Board and will allow all member Boards to have individual representation on the Board of Directors as of the AGM of 2014. AGM Decision Receive and refer to Legislation & Finance Committee.


383

Resolution #12-13 Moved By: Elizabeth Crowe York Catholic District School Board Seconded By: Carol Cotton Topic: OCSTA Representation Model Whereas: fair representation at the OCSTA Board table and at the AGM is a fundamental to the democratic process; and Whereas: membership in OCSTA may become mandatory if the association is given the legislative authority to bargain on behalf of the school Boards, as employers; and Whereas: the current system of electing Directors, Executive members and passing motions does not allow for every Board to be truly represented, based on student and/or ratepayer distribution, and does not give a fair voice to every Board at the table; and Whereas: OPSBA has a more equitable model that should be evaluated and considered for adoption in its current form or in a form modified as determined by OCSTA’s Board of Directors; and Whereas: there could be other models that should be investigated for their appropriateness; Therefore Be It Resolved That: OCSTA investigate and develop a new, fairer model of representation both for the Board of Directors and for voting at the AGM. AGM Decision Receive and refer to Legislation & Finance Committee.


384

Weighted Voting When exploring various models of representation and voting within corporate boards of directors, not-for-profit organizations and other trustee associations, it is evident that very few employ decision-making models that are premised upon weighted voting. To date, OCSTA as an association has been a one-vote-per-member structure in general or special meetings of the Association’s membership, with a weighted voting model at the Board of Directors table. The current structure of OCSTA’s Board of Directors is divided into 12 regions, based on both geography and student enrolment. The criteria for determining regions are outlined in the OCSTA by-laws under Section 5.1:

5.1.1 any Member Board with a student enrolment in excess of 35,000 FTE shall be identified as a Region entitled to one (1) representative on the Board of Directors; and 5.1.2 any Member Board or Region with a student enrolment in excess of 75,000 FTE students shall be identified as a region entitled to two representatives on the Board of Directors. 5.1.3 if and whenever the criteria set out in this section 5.1 so requires, the Corporations shall, by Special Resolution, alter the regional boundaries and the number of Directors accordingly so as to take effect at the election of Directors next following the confirmation of such Special Resolution by the Members.

Under this model at the Board of Directors table, Ottawa and York send 1 delegate each, while Toronto and Dufferin-Peel send 2 delegates each based on their student enrolment statistic. As such, a weighted voting model is already employed under the current OCSTA structure based on the FTE enrolment figures as articulated in Section 5.1 of the by-laws. 2 of the 4 resolutions received and referred at the AGM focus on exploring voting models for general or special meetings of the entire Association membership, currently a one vote per member model. In this context, a series of different models were studied to determine their applicability to the mission and governance structure of OCSTA. Weighted voting models can be premised upon a series of assumptions. For instance, one could employ a model that sees boards representing larger geographical regions receiving more votes than those representing smaller geographical areas, a model that grants larger weight to boards with higher student enrolment (as is the case on the Board of Directors), or a model that grants voting based on percentages of population within a region. In each case, it was found that no significant change to voting outcomes would be likely to occur at a general or special meeting, particularly based on the historical practice of regional voting patterns. Particular emphasis was given to the OPSBA model for weighted voting in meetings of their general assembly. Voting weight is determined by enrolment figures and applied as an allocation:


385

- boards between 1-10,000 are granted 2 votes each - boards between 10,001 and 25,000 are granted 3 votes each - boards between 25,001 and 50,000 are granted 4 votes each - boards between 50,001 and 75,000 are granted 5 votes each - boards between 75,001 and 110,000 are granted 6 votes each - boards between 110,001 and 200,000 are granted 7 votes each - and boards over 200,000 are granted 8 votes each

If applied directly to OCSTA boards’ based on student enrolment and application to voting at meetings, OCSTA’s structure would see:

- 14 boards with 2 votes each, totaling 28 votes; - 9 boards with 3 votes each, totaling 27 votes; - 3 boards with 4 votes each, totaling 12 votes; - 1 board with 5 votes, totaling 5 votes; - And 2 boards with 6 votes each, totaling 12 votes.

Before considering this model further, an essential point must be made – under the OPSBA model, boards, not individual trustees, are allocated votes. For a board’s votes to be applied to a resolution, they must allocate all of their weighted votes one way. Currently, OCSTA trustees are able to vote as they see fit, and individual boards votes can be split. For example, a board of 12 trustees could see 8 votes in favour of a given resolution with 4 not in favour. Under the OPSBA model, this is not the case. If a board has 12 trustees, an internal majority vote must take place and the majority decides how the allocated votes will be applied to a resolution. For example, a board of 12 may have 7 trustees in favour of a resolution and 5 opposed – it is the will of the 7 majority who decide how the board will apply its allocated voted under the weighted model. Regional Meetings As OCSTA staff was studying various voting models, the issue of weighted voting was a key component of the 2013 OCSTA Fall Regional Meetings. Input was sought from all boards during the open discussion portion of these five sessions. The OCSTA membership made it clear that there is no widespread desire to alter the current model of decision-making in OCSTA. A variety of concerns on this topic, mainly from the central region, were expressed, including but not limited to: the perception that the existing structure is not balanced; the suggestion that all boards should have a representative on the OCSTA Board of Directors; the disparity between a negative correlation between the number of trustees in boards and the number of constituents that each trustee represents; the desire to ensure that the vote from every board and every trustee counts; a proposal that voting and representation be weighted by student population; the expression that labour matters have heightened the frustration over time. In most regions and in the comments provided by most boards, there is a sense that the existing structure of the OCSTA Board of Directors is not broken. Although some smaller boards indicated that it would be better if each board had its own representative, it was simultaneously


386

acknowledged that a move in this direction would be impractical, expensive and less efficient. The current reality is that the biggest boards in the province have one or two seats on the OCSTA Board and have the right to select their own representative. Smaller boards must share a regional representative and at times feel disadvantaged when the regional representative is not from their board. To address this, there was a suggestion that the boards within a particular region could consider rotating representation, with the regional seat moving from board to board on a predetermined basis. At most of the Fall Regional Meetings, the disparity in the cost-per-student was mentioned. Currently the largest boards pay about two dollars per student and the smallest boards pay over seven dollars per student. The formula in itself recognizes the fact that large boards have more infrastructure and may utilize OCSTA services to a lesser degree than smaller boards. This point, however, is the basis of the fee structure as it currently exists. A second point that came up repeatedly relates to the benefits of membership. In the examples provided, it is the largest boards who benefit most dollar-wise when OCSTA is successful on projects such as Access Copyright and the School Energy Coalition. Although there are individual objections to the status quo, the pervasive sentiment is that there is equilibrium within OCSTA in terms of fees, benefits, representation and voting. There was no overwhelming push for change. If there was one message that was made loud and clear, it is that the vote of each and every trustee is to be valued. Regardless of the size of the board or the number of trustees, no one was voluntarily saying that their voice should be diminished. Conclusion After months of exploration, it is clear that there is no easy or simple method of addressing the concerns expressed by those 4 boards who submitted resolutions requesting that a review of decision-making in the Association take place. Under the current model, 3 of those boards who submitted resolutions have significant influence over the Association’s decisions based on the weighted voting model at the Board of Directors table. Resolutions 8 and 11 seek to amend the voting structure and representation model at the OCSTA Board of Directors table, with Resolution 11 seeking specifically to allow a representative from each board in the system to have a representative on the Board at all times. To date, the justification for dividing members into a regional structure within OCSTA has been a more efficient and flexible model of representation at the Board table. At a time when the Association is expected to make immediate decisions and address matters of urgency, expanding the size of the Board of Directors to at least 29 members would drastically slow the decision-making ability of the Association from its current model. Further, such a change would create enormous strain on the Association’s budget when paying expenses and per diems for Board-related meetings or events. The OPSBA model of weighted voting would fundamentally alter OCSTA’s structure from a trustee’s association to a school board’s association. The one-vote-per-member model has received wide support from elected Catholic trustees throughout the Association’s history, and in


387

order to effectively implement the OPSBA model of voting, the Association would need to amend its by-laws and practices significantly. Based on these findings, it is the OCSTA staff recommendation that no alteration to the voting and decision-making structure of OCSTA be made at this time. L:\USR\Kevin\Reports\Report on Weighted Voting.docx


388


Moved by: Frank DiTomasso Windsor-Essex Catholic District School Board


Topic: OCSTA Trustee Representation

Whereas: the Ministry of Education is formally recognizing OCSTA as the bargaining agent for Catholic School Boards in Ontario representing a significant change in the role of the organization and a shift in authority from local Catholic boards to OCSTA; and

Whereas: there is no financial or operational issue more significant to the delivery of education at the local level than employee contracts; and

Whereas: local Boards are elected to provide a voice for constituents and to address the local and unique needs of each area in the Province; and

Whereas: the current model of combining Boards regionally with one representative chosen from each group of boards is no longer adequate and does not reflect the responsibility of local boards in addressing unique local needs.


OCSTA change its current structure to allow one member from each Board to sit on the OCSTA Board. Committee Recommendation Not approve. Rationale (see attachment for Resolution #23-15) This topic was the subject of four different resolutions in 2013. Research was conducted into various models and other organizations were consulted. After significant analysis, it was determined that there was no merit in abandoning the existing model.

389

Dufferin Peel Catholic District School Board

Documents

Transcript of Dufferin Peel Catholic District School Board