Editor:
The letter from Wesley Jeffries and Rosalind Patrick re: "SD46 decision short-sighted" (Coast Reporter, June 8) brought to our attention the potential loss of a successful program due to monetary restraints and school board choices.
In the same edition reporter Ben Ingram ("New numbers show aging trend continues") included a quote stating, "Over the past decade, the Coast's student population has decreased by 25 per cent."
From other statistics he provides, it sounds as though this trend will continue.
I have a few questions regarding these two situations: One: since our school population has decreased by 25 per cent, is it reasonable to suggest that our school board trustee population be reduced by a similar percentage?
The School Act Part 4, Section 30 (2) tells us that a board can consist of three, five, seven or nine trustees, as determined by order of the minister.
Should our board members be requesting the minister to reduce their number to three?
Two: can our present seven trustees justify the deduction of their remuneration from what is becoming a smaller and smaller pot for the district's organization?
Three: do the trustees truly believe that the welfare of our students should be the priority?
Four: how much money could be re-directed to programs such as the Aboriginal education program, if our present trustees took it upon themselves to better match their numbers to the dwindling school population?
Colleen Elson
Gibsons
