[quote=“eccentric”]
I respect the opinions of the business people who make a living in that part of town, and I think that their objections should be taken very seriously.[/quote]
One of the main objections was that Cow Bay was a dangerous place. You respect that opinion and take it seriously? Just for clarification.
Yea, I do. I’m not sure I agree, but I don’t think it should be dismissed.
What if I had gone to Council and said “Cow Bay is a safe place”. Would you dismiss that statement also? It’s just as hard to prove.
If it’s safe enough for Kathy Bedard’s school, safe enough for thousands of tourists, safe enough for shoppers of all ages, then why is it unsafe for this new school?
Absolutely none of the Cow Bay merchants and business owners opposed Kathy Bedard’s school in the dangerous Cow Bay area. All the arguments and opposition to the SD52 school apparently don’t apply to the absent Kathy Bedard.
Here’s the article from the Daily News. Hope they don’t mine me posting it here.
It’s on their website: tinyurl.com/65ks2z
City sides with merchants, closes book on new school
By George T. Baker
The Daily News
Wednesday, December 10, 2008
Succumbing to fierce opposition from Cow Bay merchants, city council decided last night to vote against the approval of a proposed innovative alternative school on First Avenue East.
City council called it a lesson learned about cooperation and consultation.
The school board said the lesson should have been taught first before the issue was tested in the public.
Council voted three-to-two against zoning bylaw No. 3272, meaning the school district will have to find another location for the school.
The decision did not sit well with school district superintendent Eric Mercer, who felt the city was appraised of the plans from the beginning and knew exactly what the school district was looking for.
“When we began our process, we had no idea about we would end up having to talk first to Cow Bay (merchants),” said Mercer.
The controversial plan to place a school near the Cow Bay business area had Cow Bay merchants and light industrial shop owners up in arms, fearing a degradation of their existing business area.
The proposed site had sat vacant for two years and was available for a commercial business to fill it, according to building owner Robert Stromdahl.
“There is no one coming to rent it out,” he warned.
Stromdahl attempted to allay fears that a stampede of children would ruin a tourist’s walk along First Avenue, stating that it shouldn’t be a problem. But he did not convince the Cow Bay merchants who opposed the project,
“This is a retail store front and a prime location for business. A school has no place there,” said Cow Bay Merchants Association president Glen Saunders.
The district’s case stated the school would benefit from being surrounded by light industrial companies, citing a need to get students who would attend the proposed school closer to trade vocations. But light industrial shop owners opposed the plan, claiming they have not seen interest in their work from teenagers before.
“If the kids got on to my land, who would be liable for this? If there are 40 kids with no playground where will they go?” asked Broadwater Industries owner Doug Mackereth.
Another shop owner was more blunt in his assessment of the rationale for the school.
“I have accommodated five kids over the 43 years I have been in welding (business). I don’t think that these (participating) kids learned anything,” said welding shop owner Neil Foreman, who reasoned that the students who bothered to apprentice for a week would either not show up every day or would not behave productively when there.
After all the arguments for and against the re-zoning were heard, city council put the motion to a vote.
Councillors Joy Thorkelson and Nelson Kinney voted in favour of the school, while councillors Sheila Gordon-Payne and Gina Garon voted against, leaving Mayor Jack Mussallem to cast the deciding vote.
Mussallem voted ‘no’.
“I don’t think anyone questions the validity of the facility,” said Mussallem.
“The school board was very thorough in their analysis and how they wished to proceed. Had they had an opportunity to talk with the neighbours (before) there may have been more support and there may not have been as much opposition as there was tonight.”
Since when do high school kids use playgrounds?
My thoughts exactly… they pretty much only use them to drink in in the middle of the night!
Isn’t the angle regarding the other “school” already being there a bit of a red herring? They are occupying space that was already zoned as office space. It used to be part of Forestry. And aren’t they a private enterprise that offers training? Not so much a “school” in the same way we are talking about the Alternate School which is part of the School District.
The whole issue was to include schools into the zoning and that would potentially open the doors to have elementary school students and perhaps preschoolers down there. With the way the school district has been handling the alternate school over the past five years - this would be the third move - they might change their mind in two years again and make it a space to house one of the Early Learning Initiative’s preschools. Who knows? This has been touted as an innovation. How is it going to evolve?
It’s the unknown that worries people.
The location IS in the Cow Bay area but the previous owner opted out of Cow Bay because of problems he was having with the city staff(Tom Ireland)
All I can say is that I already lost faith in our council and I do believe there is some sort of discrimination going on by the “Merchants” of Cow Bay.
All the bitching and moaning and finger pointing aside, my question is; why would you want to put a school, alternate or otherwise, in a light industrial area, crawling with strangers? Why would you put high school kids that are at risk or vulnerable in the middle of shopping and eating establishments? This seems ass backwards to me? Have any of you thought back to being a teenager? (from the way you guys act on here I assume you’re not too far removed 
) All I thought about back then was shopping and eating, and scheming of ways to get out of school. Scary thing is, I was a good student. Can’t imagine someone who doesn’t like or adapt well to school being put on temptation island in Cow Bay. Never mind the merchants, think of the kids. I think council got this one right and the school district, as good as their intentions were, did not think this through at all.
Just to clarify again, this isn’t the same model of alternate school that we’re all used to. The school purposefully left out “Alternate” from its name to make that point.
The school will be teaching adult students and 8-12, specialized IT courses (including industry certification courses), college credit, outdoor education, as well as a flexible core curriculum.
The model we’re following has been successfully used in other cities, and in every single case the schools are in the middle of commercial or industrial areas.
I don’t think any of the objections were to the education model being used at the school, but rather the safety and character of Cow Bay.
My name is Steve Riley. As of 1st Feb 2009, I will be the Principal of Pacific Coast School. This school replaces the present alternate school.
The mandate for this school is very different and far more encompassing of the educational needs of secondary and adult students in our city. The concept of this school was developed from a major consultation endeavor by the school district, which started last spring.
This consultation included the city.
My involvement started this summer. We met first with the mayor and then with the city manager and his staff. The process was explained to us, and we were lead through it every step of the way by city staff. At no point was it suggested that we canvas owners of businesses. In fact this was a role that city council directed its staff to do at the 1st and 2nd reading.
As a school had recently opened its door across the street from our location the tirade that greeted us at the city council chamber on Tuesday was, to say the least, very surprising.
The decision of council:
I think it is important to understand that no one from the city manager’s office, elected officials, residents, owners ever contacted us to request information. The school district has been open and above board from the start of this project.
As to the School:
At present, about 50% of our students are adults.
All of our secondary students are in school. (not on the streets driving cranes around)
We will be offering different courses for different student needs so adults, techies, outdoor enthusiasts, students who want to try a different type of school.
Every aspect of this new school has been extensively researched. The education offered will be top notch in every way. The site, a vacant site for 10 years, was chosen because it is the best fit with our model. A retail marine store next door, motor bike store below, close to the water in an active employment area. There is no traffic or parking problem!
Monday’s city council meeting raises serious concerns. Many have been voiced here. The 7 people we elected to guide our city made a decision that is having far reaching consequences.
When racism, conflict of interest, bias, are reported provincially, and soon nationally, it is not something that goes away easily.
Several well established business have reported directly to council that their operations are a danger to the public, both residents and tourists alike.
I imagine now that the city will have to address this issue with some urgency as legal liability has been admitted. Non action by the city could be seen as culpable in the case of a law suit.
The opinions expressed on Monday and supported by 3 elected officials do not represent those views held by the vast majority of people in Prince Rupert. The School District commitment to this project and to the education of all students in this city is still resolute.
We have lost our best option, but we will open on Feb 1st 2009.
Some good points made by Steve, but I think the city’s liability is covered by having the area zoned as a light industrial site. So the hazards are, I believe acceptable and expected because of that. On the other hand, could amending the zoning area to allow a school have opened the city up to liability? Not sure. As for the conflict of interest, the two councellors that had conflict of interest (so I have read and not confirmed myself) either bowed out or abstained from the vote, so that shouldn’t really be an issue. So I don’t think that council is at fault here, just the opinions expressed by some of the merchants. Another question that came to mind is, if the school is to take advantage of the nearby businesses ie. motorbike shop, retailer etc, would the school not have contacted them in an effort to form a partnership or program to involve them? and did SD 52 take it upon themselves to have an information session with their new neighbours and get support from the existing businesses? Thanks. 'amended" One more question. What other locations are / were being considered for the ‘alternate’ school? Thanks.
I do not think there was any conflict other than AA if she still has a business or whatever in Cow Bay. The other councillors were just cowardly by not taking part in the decision.
Does the other councillor not work in the adult education sector as well? And I thought AA was employed by SD52? Both seem like conflicts to me. Correct me if I’m wrong. 
From my understanding of “Conflict of Interest” one would have to “personally” benefit from a decision. Meaning getting direct benifit from any decision, monetary gain is a good example.
Working for the School District is not in conflict of interest, these “excuses” are being thrown out there for councillors to save face.
In municiple government, the Councillors and/or Mayor are essentially on an honor system. They are supposed to remove themselves if there is, or could be a perceived conflict of interest.
All I am saying is these councillors in question could have provided some valuable insight into what has become a touchy subject, especially with some experience in the education field. Instead they conveniently use COI as way of distancing themselves from any decision made on the subject.
That, to me is Cowardly!
Yes they could have and may have provided some insight, but they should not vote themselves.