Thank you for the opportunity to speak.

My name is Kimberley Love. I have been watching this Accommodation Review Process for the past few months. The youngest of my four children is a student at OSCVI. Full disclosure: she has been the student representative on the ARC Committee.

I've sat through several of the public meetings. And I've read through many more of the submissions online. As a mother, and as an educator ( I was on the part-time faculty of Wilfrid Laurier University prior to my return to Grey County) I can understand the concerns of parents who want the best possible opportunities for their children.

But we also want the best for the larger community. The choices we make here will impact not only our current students, and future students – but they are a signal to the world about our faith in the future of our community. Are we optimistic about the future of our community? Because our vision of our community will be reflected in the decisions we make here.

Let me say that I won't be making comment on the necessary closure decisions of our elementary schools; I accept that we cannot keep these facilities operating at their current capacity levels. (As an alumnus of a one-room rural school, I will add, however, a note of accord with some of the defenders of Derby School – who have made some impassioned arguments for the value of a rural school.)

But my concern tonight is for the future of OSCVI as an institution built for secondary students. This school was an ambitious and visionary community project. The auditorium was, in effect, a gift from this community to our children. The project of building this amazing school was a celebration of the past and an assertion of our faith in the future.

I believe that any decision by the Board should include the continuation of this school as an institution for secondary students. This school is geographically positioned for future growth. It has an unparalleled access to educational opportunities: green space, proximity to the hospital, to Georgian College, to co-op placement locations. It is our best – and newest – educational asset.

This is not a criticism of West Hill: a school which offers great opportunities to its students as well. But West Hill is a school now in physical decline. We need to be looking ahead to a new construction project there. Crowding all our secondary school students into a declining facility is not economically rational. But worst of all, the reduction of our secondary school structure – to a single school – is a choice that reflects a lack of optimism and ambition for our community.

We all want a future that includes enough students for two high schools. In choosing to move to a single school - in the more restricted of the two properties – we are not choosing that future.

I've heard many arguments about the advantages of a "super school": in terms of variety in programs offered, etc. Firstly, let me say that Isabel is my youngest of four children, and I've seen many different high school models. The biggest is not always the best. School culture is probably the most important determinant of success: passionate teachers, an inclusive environment, a student-centred culture. Other submissions have noted that the two schools have different strengths. Here's the beauty of that: our students have the option at any time to take a course in the "school across town". Greater cooperation and coordination between our two schools eliminates any perceived disadvantage. Everything available at West Hill is accessible to OSCVI students. The marvelous assets of OSCVI are always available to students from West Hill.

While disappointed that declining enrolments – and a lackluster local economy – meant that school restructuring was necessary AT ALL, I could see the merit of the Board's original proposal: to keep two high schools, and simply accelerate the admission of students by moving them to 7 to 12 schools. We put our 4-year-olds in schools with 14-year olds. The province is full of 7 to 12 schools operating with great success.

I urge the Board to reconsider the merits of their original proposal to maintain two high schools. It allows our students to benefit from the new, exceptional, thoughtfully-built secondary school at OSCVI. It encourages a collaborative new relationship between the schools: so our students have the advantage of TWO facilities, depending on their interests. And above all, it is a statement of faith in the future of this community, because it provides for maximum flexibility in the future. It keeps an efficient frontier that improves our capacity ratios for now, but gives us room for new growth.

There is an element of "if you build it, they will come" in this proposal. But if we begin to close our doors – to demonstrate our own lack of faith in our community – we are planning for failure.

This is not just an educational choice. This is a choice that will influence our local economy.. and the future of this area. Two high schools – including a vibrant OSCVI – is a choice for a bright future.

Thank you for your time.