MONTREAL – The parents of a former Roslyn School student have asked Quebec’s highest court to quash a $234,000 defamation lawsuit won by their son’s former teacher.

Earlier this month, Quebec Court Justice Danielle Richer ordered Kathryn Rosentein and Hagop Artinian to pay that amount for comments they made [...]]]> Source: Irwin Block
Montreal Gazette

MONTREAL – The parents of a former Roslyn School student have asked Quebec’s highest court to quash a $234,000 defamation lawsuit won by their son’s former teacher.

Earlier this month, Quebec Court Justice Danielle Richer ordered Kathryn Rosentein and Hagop Artinian to pay that amount for comments they made after withdrawing their suit against teacher Mary Kanavaros for humiliating and intimidating their son in front of the class.

The parents accepted an out-of-court deal – $5,000 from the English Montreal School Board, no admission of liability or responsibility, and confidentiality as to the terms of settlement.

The teacher sued when the parents outside the court said, “We made our point.”

Artinian was quoted as saying of the teacher, “She’s a marked lady.”

The factum says the confidentiality clause only covers the terms of the agreement, not a “complete elimination of freedom of expression.”

Instead, lawyer Julius Grey in a cross-appeal asked the Quebec Court of Appeal to award the parents $100,000 to discourage SLAPP lawsuits – those that have the effect of silencing or intimidating critics by burdening them with heavy legal costs.

iblock@thegazette.canwest.com

QUÉBEC – Le ministère de l’Éducation ira de l’avant avec le nouveau bulletin unique dans les écoles du Québec, mais pas avant l’an prochain. La nouvelle ministre de l’Éducation, Line Beauchamp, en a fait l’annonce vendredi matin au cours d’un point de presse.

Prévu initialement pour la présente rentrée scolaire, [...]]]> Le Journal de Montréal

QUÉBEC – Le ministère de l’Éducation ira de l’avant avec le nouveau bulletin unique dans les écoles du Québec, mais pas avant l’an prochain. La nouvelle ministre de l’Éducation, Line Beauchamp, en a fait l’annonce vendredi matin au cours d’un point de presse.

Prévu initialement pour la présente rentrée scolaire, Québec a finalement opté pour que le bulletin unique soit en vigueur en 2011-2012, le temps que les professeurs suivent une formation.

Mme Beauchamp a expliqué qu’il faut laisser le temps aux enseignants de se préparer à ce changement important.

«Il y a 90 000 professeurs concernés par ce changement, alors il faut s’assurer qu’ils soient en mesure de le faire, a-t-elle expliqué. Ils devront tous suivre de la formation.»

Le nouveau bulletin sera plus clair pour les parents, a assuré Mme Beauchamp, puisqu’il sera basé sur l’évaluation des connaissances. Il ressemblera donc à ce qui était en place avant la réforme pédagogique.

La ministre Beauchamp a opté pour que les écoles produisent trois bulletins par an, alors que sa prédécesseure Michelle Courchesne en proposait plutôt quatre.

Un premier bulletin sera remis aux parents en novembre, qui comptera pour 20% de la note finale, un second en mars, qui aura la même valeur, et finalement un dernier à la toute fin de l’année scolaire, qui représentera 60% de la note finale.

La note de passage sera de 60% dans toutes les écoles du Québec. Et au secondaire, le redoublement sera de nouveau possible.

Mme Beauchamp a affirmé avoir l’appui des différents syndicats pour la mise en place de ce nouveau bulletin.

Cette décision survient quelques jours seulement après que le Conseil supérieur de l’éducation eut vertement critiqué l’instauration d’un bulletin unique dans l’ensemble des écoles de la province.

À peine arrivée en poste, la nouvelle ministre de l’Éducation, Line Beauchamp, décidera d’ici «quelques jours» si les élèves québécois seront évalués à l’aide du nouveau bulletin «unique» et «plus clair» que les libéraux promettent depuis des mois.

Le Conseil supérieur de l’éducation a ajouté son grain de sel [...]]]> Sébastien Ménard
Journal de Montréal

À peine arrivée en poste, la nouvelle ministre de l’Éducation, Line Beauchamp, décidera d’ici «quelques jours» si les élèves québécois seront évalués à l’aide du nouveau bulletin «unique» et «plus clair» que les libéraux promettent depuis des mois.

Le Conseil supérieur de l’éducation a ajouté son grain de sel dans cette saga, hier, en recommandant à Mme Beauchamp de ne pas aller de l’avant avec le nouveau relevé de notes présenté par sa prédécesseure, Michelle Courchesne.

Même si elle vient tout juste d’arriver, la nouvelle ministre «sait que la rentrée s’en vient très rapidement», a indiqué son attachée de presse, Amélie Légaré.

«C’est sûr que l’avis du Conseil supérieur de l’éducation est le plus critique, dit-elle, mais on a reçu plus de 40 mémoires sur le sujet. On veut prendre le temps de se faire une tête. La ministre va prendre une décision au cours des prochains jours», a-t-elle précisé.

«Compétences transversales»

La recommandation négative du Conseil supérieur de l’éducation est venue relancer le débat sur la pertinence de ce nouveau bulletin, qui serait plus simple, identique dans toutes les écoles du Québec et dans lequel on ne parlerait plus de «compétences transversales.»

Les directeurs d’école jugent que la mise en place de ce relevé de notes est toujours «possible», cet automne, mais il faudra agir très rapidement, avertit la présidente de la Fédération québécoise des directions d’établissement d’enseignement, Chantal Longpré. «On est dans le super-urgent», lance-t-elle.

Mme Longpré appuie la mise en place de ce nouveau bulletin, «en autant que ça se fasse correctement». Elle estime que cet outil répondra mieux aux besoins des parents et ne souhaite pas attendre «encore un an» avant son implantation.

«On est tout le temps en train d’attendre en éducation», déplore-t-elle.

La Fédération des comités de parents ne croit pas que le relevé de notes promis par Michelle Courchesne fera son apparition cet automne. «La rentrée scolaire est dans deux semaines et il n’y a pas encore de décision prise», souligne le président de l’organisme, François Paquet. Il rappelle que les comités de parents n’ont «jamais demandé de modifications au bulletin », bien qu’ils soient favorables à l’arrivée d’un relevé de notes unique.

Commissions scolaires rassurées

La Fédération des commissions scolaires est rassurée par la recommandation du Conseil supérieur de l’éducation.

L’organisme souhaite que la ministre attende au moins un an avant d’aller de l’avant avec ce bulletin, question d’implanter tous les changements que cela engendre. «On pense qu’il est plus sage de reporter ce projet-là pour prendre une décision éclairée», dit la présidente de la Fédération, Josée Bouchard.

Voici des extraits de l’avis rendu hier par le Conseil supérieur de l’éducation.

«Les changements proposés [...] ne sont [...] pas en cohérence avec le Programme de formation de l’école québécoise.» «Des changements d’une telle envergure apparaissent prématurés.»

«Les modifications proposées [...] ne font pas consensus. »

«L’ampleur et la nouveauté des modifications proposées, le délai de consultation ainsi que la date d’entrée en vigueur [...] heurtent de front les acteurs du milieu scolaire [...] Les modifications ne semblent pas tenir compte des pratiques existantes [...]»

Citant des «acteurs» du milieu, le Conseil ajoute ceci :

«Toute modification implantée en catastrophe entraîne son lot de problèmes et une telle improvisation risquerait d’apporter beaucoup plus de confusion que de clarté en plus de susciter de l’inquiétude et de la frustration chez le personnel.»

In an unusually critical report to the government, the Conseil supérieur de l’éducation said [...]]]>

Advisory agency says draft regulation would weaken curriculum objectives

The Quebec Education Department’s controversial plan to introduce a uniform report card this fall and change how students are graded took a direct hit yesterday from its own advisory body.

In an unusually critical report to the government, the Conseil supérieur de l’éducation said the government shouldn’t go ahead with the changes planned for Sept. 1, calling them premature because the new curriculum has just been fully implemented in the province’s schools.

The changes aren’t consistent with the new curriculum’s aims and would weaken important parts of it, the report said.

The government wants to simplify how students are assessed and introduce a uniform report card for Quebec’s public and private schools that’s easier for parents and students to understand.

But the council said the proposed changes “go well beyond” those objectives.

The controversial curriculum was introduced into the province’s schools in 2000 and went into effect last fall in Grade 11.

The council consulted different groups in Quebec’s education system about the draft regulation. All those who weighed in on the timeline objected to the changes taking effect Sept. 1. It was a shock for people in the system that a draft regulation came out in June with a consultation period in July, council president Nicole Boutin said.

“The government’s position remains the same – it wants a uniform report card,” said Dave Leclerc, a spokesperson for Education Minister Line Beauchamp, who took over the portfolio Wednesday in a cabinet shuffle.

Beauchamp is very aware that putting it into effect could upset some things if they go too fast, he added.

“They just [...]]]>

(CNN) — As a toddler, Ian Barrier got expelled from day care.

“They just said that he was all over the place, he couldn’t handle the structure, they didn’t have the staff or the skills to deal with it,” said his mother, Amy Barr. “They said, ‘We think he has ADD or ADHD’ and I’m like, ‘What is that?”

Ian, now 11, and his 9-year-old brother Aidan are just two examples of some 5 million children in the United States who have received the diagnosis of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), a condition marked by impulsive behavior and a lack of focus.

But although this is a medical condition with medical treatments available, often doctors aren’t the ones suggesting a diagnosis. More on ADHD

Many parents begin their struggles with treating their children’s ADHD the way that Barr did: with a suggested diagnosis from a school or day care setting. That’s a problem, doctors say, when there could be many other factors contributing to a child’s behavior.

For a teacher to suggest that a child has ADHD is “inappropriate and dangerous,” says Dr. Elizabeth Roberts, child psychiatrist in Murrieta, California. Depression, anxiety and abuse are all possibilities in a child’s life that could lead to attention problems, Roberts said. That means that many children are receiving medication for the wrong problem.

Roberts wants to say to all educators: “There are many, many diagnoses that cause these problems, including abuse and depression and anxiety. So please, withhold your judgment.”

But Barr is happy that her son’s day care center mentioned the condition to her. It explained Ian’s behaviors that she had been excusing with the adage “boys will be boys.” The center also directed her to a facility where he could get tested.

“I’m just glad that they brought it up, because I was living in it and didn’t know any better,” she said.

In Barr’s case, having gotten her kids tested for ADHD even before school, the educational system has been supportive. But the question of medication has plagued her, with years of trying different combinations of drugs — sometimes four or five at a time.

Despite medication, Ian pulled the fire alarm at his fourth day care center, dispatching the same fire department that would get him out of a tree at age 9, Barr said. And both brothers have spent time in a psychiatric ward at a children’s hospital; for the younger one, it may have been because of overmedication, Barr said.

“You go through all of that, and it’s just various different medications, and then you start to feel guilty: I’m drugging my kid,” said Barr, of Fleming Island, Florida. Her boys are now both on just one medication — Vyvanse (lisdexamfetamine) — for focusing in school.

All too often, parents come to pediatrician Dr. Claudia Gold’s office asking for a prescription for ADHD, based on a recommendation from school. When she consults with parents alone, however, she’s likely to hear stories of trauma: a death in the family, an abusive relationship, and other life experiences that the teacher knew nothing about.

“I think that sometimes folks want an immediate answer and they want to help a child as quickly as possible,” said Cheryl Rode, Director of Clinical Operations at the San Diego Center for Children in California. “Medication is quick and easy but it’s not the answer alone for working with kids who have ADHD.”

Experts agree that ADHD does exist as a real disorder, and that some children really do benefit from medication. Studies have shown a biological basis to the disorder and a genetic component, suggesting it can be passed down in families.

But it’s not the teacher’s place to make diagnoses, or to recommend medication, Gold said.

Teachers and related school personnel have an important role in identifying learning and social challenges faced by students, including those with ADHD, says Clarke Ross, CEO of CHADD (Children and Adults with Attention Deficit / Hyperactivity Disorder). But teachers should never give a diagnosis for the purpose of medication use, or advise the use of medications, he said.

Alana Morales, of Thornton, Colorado, is one of those teachers who has brought up the subject of ADHD testing with many parents. She doesn’t tell parents to medicate their kids, but brings up the subject of getting children tested because she thinks it’s important for parents to know.

“You have to be so careful because, again, we are not doctors,” she said. “But does that mean we don’t recognize it? No.”

Not every child with ADHD needs medication, doctors say, and Morales said some students benefit more from counseling, special adjustments in school, a tutor, or a different environment for doing homework. It’s helpful for parents to get informed about the condition and become advocates for their children — but some may make the situation worse by having a closed mind to interventions and denying that there’s anything wrong, she said.

“You’re really setting them up for failure, because it’s not a crime, it doesn’t mean you’re less of a parent if your child learns differently,” she said.

Rode agrees with Roberts that teachers should not recommend medication, but thinks that teachers have an excellent frame of reference for what is typical or normal development.

Also the parent of two children with ADHD, Morales has specific strategies she uses when there are kids with ADHD in her class: don’t seat them together, put them on the edges of the classroom so she can see them better, and sometimes modify assignments.

Providing an environment conducive to helping kids with conditions such as this is getting harder as budget-tightening schools cut back on teachers, Morales said.

Last year, teaching at a public school in Arizona, Morales had one classroom with 37 students, which included at least four kids with ADHD and one with Asperger’s syndrome. And teachers whose job it is to provide extra help to those kids get responsibility for more students, leaving them with less time for each one.

Roberts estimates that only about 10 to 20 percent of children who receive the diagnosis of ADHD actually need medication.

While parents like Barr have tried to inform themselves as much as possible about ADHD and treatment options, some doctors say the condition gets misapplied because it is a quick and easy catch-all diagnosis for a variety of behavior problems, with drugs available to treat it.

Parents are also culprits, and bear some responsibility for their children’s behavior, Roberts said. She thinks a lot of kids just need better structure and discipline in the home.

“Parents want to leap-frog over the parenting job and get right to the grandparenting,” she said. “Everyone wants to have fun with their kids and everyone wants to be popular with their kids like Grandma is. But the reality is: Someone has to be the bad guy or the kid never learns.”

Morales recommends that parents stay involved in their child’s school lives by helping them with homework, assisting with organizing their papers, and writing notes to teachers so that everyone is on the same page.

On behalf of her own two children with ADHD, Morales is writing letters now to their teachers explaining how her kids learn differently and what accommodations have been made in the past (they are both on medication). She is also asking the teachers to let her know about any problems this school year.

Looking back, Barr wishes that when her children first got the ADHD diagnosis and then started school, she could have had a teleconference with the school and the psychiatrist at the same time. Instead, she had to relay what the teachers said about her children’s behavior to the psychiatrist, and then the psychiatrist’s treatment decisions back to the school.

MONTREAL, Aug. 3 /CNW Telbec/ – Teacher Mary Kanavaros won an important battle in Superior Court on Friday, July 30th, when the Honourable Justice Danielle Richer awarded her the sum of $234,011.87 in damages in a defamation case against parents who originally sued her [...]]]> Source: CNW

Mary Kanavaros Case – Montreal Teachers Association

MONTREAL, Aug. 3 /CNW Telbec/ – Teacher Mary Kanavaros won an important battle in Superior Court on Friday, July 30th, when the Honourable Justice Danielle Richer awarded her the sum of $234,011.87 in damages in a defamation case against parents who originally sued her for $155,000 in May 2005.

The parents, Hagop Artinian and Kathryn Rosenstein had lodged a suit against Kanavaros, Jim McMorran, principal of Roslyn School, and the English Montreal School Board, claiming that Kanavaros had humiliated their son. The case went to court on March 25, 2008, at which time the parents, represented by their lawyer, Me. Julius Grey, offered to drop the case in exchange for a negligible amount of money, with no admission of responsibility by any of the defendants, and the undertakings to keep the terms of the agreement confidential.

Mary Kanavaros reluctantly accepted the dropping of the case. She had looked forward to the opportunity of clearing her reputation, but wanted peace for herself and her colleagues at the same time. Regrettably, the parents chose to leave the courtroom and immediately defame her by speaking to the media as if there had been some judgment rendered, stating that “even without a trial, they made their point”. “She’s a marked lady and before she makes any more unprofessional moves, she’ll have to think twice.”

Mrs. Justice Richer found the statements made by the parents to the media were defamatory, and that Kanavaros had been seriously affected by their claims against her.

In awarding the amount of money to Kanavaros, Mrs. Justice Richer included an amount of $25,000 in punitive damages, stating that voluntary, intentional and malicious attacks to Kanavaros’ good reputation by the parents had been abundantly proven, and that it was important to dissuade these parents from dispensing their own justice.

Mrs. Justice Richer went on to say that other parents need to get the same message, since professionals such as teachers may spend years building their reputations and have them destroyed in a matter of minutes by television, the Internet, and newspapers.

A relieved Kanavaros can now hopefully begin to heal from the damages caused by the malicious attack on her reputation. Ruth Rosenfield, President of the Montreal Teachers Association, which supported Kanavaros’ legal suit against the parents, expressed her satisfaction with the judgment on Kanavaros’ behalf, and on behalf of teachers in general. “This judgment should make parents think twice or three times before attacking the reputation of a teacher in a malicious way” stated Rosenfield. She saluted Mary Kanavaros for her courage and her family and friends for their support in this fight that will clearly benefit all teachers, and praised Mary’s lawyers, Mes. Martine L. Tremblay and Anastasia Flouris, for presenting the evidence in such a clear and forceful manner. She also noted the exemplary work of MTA Executive Assistant John Winrow, who dealt with the case and supported Mary Kanavaros throughout the six-year period, from the beginning of the issue.

“It will be interesting to see if the same extensive media coverage given to the parents’ attack on Mary will be given to this decision by Justice Richer” commented Rosenfield. “It would be the only fair thing for The Gazette and other CanWest newspapers, as well as CBC, CTV, and CJAD, all of whom that ran the original attack, to do. We’ll see!”

“ It’s almost discriminatory,” said Steve Bletas, chairperson of Laval’s Sir Wilfrid Laurier School Board, about the fact that homeowners affiliated with the town’s English-language board are being charged a higher school-tax rate than those affiliated with the local French-language board, the Commission scolaire de Laval. While [...]]]> It’s discrimination in either language

Gazette Editorial

“ It’s almost discriminatory,” said Steve Bletas, chairperson of Laval’s Sir Wilfrid Laurier School Board, about the fact that homeowners affiliated with the town’s English-language board are being charged a higher school-tax rate than those affiliated with the local French-language board, the Commission scolaire de Laval. While discrimination might not have been the intent of the government measures, as it stands the situation is in fact discriminatory, period.

The problem arises from the Education Department’s formula for calculating school-tax rates and revenue levels that set a maximum school-tax rate as well as a maximum amount of tax revenue a board can collect. That maximum rate is 35 cents per $ 100 home valuation.

At that rate, the French-language board would have exceeded its maximum total amount and was therefore able to lower its rate down to about 30 cents per $ 100 valuation. Sir Wilfrid Laurier, with a substantially smaller tax base, meanwhile needs to tax at the maximum rate to get the money it needs. That means the English board taxes the owner of a $ 400,000 home $ 200 a year more than the francophone board does.

The discrepancy – and unfairness – is even greater in the Laurentian region where anglophone parents are taxed at the Sir Wilfrid Laurier rate while francophones come under a separate board that charges even less than the French-language Laval board.

There is a provision in place for boards, such as Wilfrid Laurier, with a tax base that can’t deliver the maximum total amount of revenue to receive equalization funding to make up the difference. There is a catch, however: To receive the equalization grant a recipient board must tax at the maximum level, which is what has led to the Laval situation. This situation is exacerbated by the fact that only homeowners with children who attend public schools in a given jurisdiction are required to pay taxes to the board whose schools their children attend. Others are free to choose the board to which they wish to pay the school tax, which, given the discrepancy in rates, could understandably prompt Laval anglophones with no children in school to pay their taxes to the French-language board, further eroding Sir Wilfrid Laurier’s tax base.

The board has complained to the Education Department and so far has been put on hold. An aide to minister Michelle Courchesne said late last week that the matter is being studied. The aide added that it is a complex situation in that the school tax formula is based on a range of factors, including size of territory, transportation requirements, the number of schools in a jurisdiction, etc. More simple is the fact that public education is a basic public service for which some people shouldn’t have to pay more than their neighbours, no matter what language they speak.

La présidente de [...]]]> Ariane Lacoursière
La Presse

Même si elle considère que le ministère de l’Éducation a posé un geste «courageux» en décidant d’implanter un bulletin unique au Québec, la Commission scolaire de Montréal (CSDM) estime que plusieurs ajustements restent à faire avant que toutes les écoles de la province ne puissent l’appliquer

La présidente de la CSDM, Diane De Courcy, souhaite entre autres qu’une pondération nationale, un cadre de référence, une grille de correction ainsi que des directives claires soient fixées par le gouvernement. «Si toutes ces précisions sont communiquées avant le 30 septembre, on pourra produire les nouveaux bulletins pour janvier 2011. Mais sinon, on ne pourra pas les avoir avant la rentrée 2011», explique Mme De Courcy.

La présidente de la CSDM souhaite que les nouveaux bulletins uniques soient disponibles le plus rapidement possibles. «Mais la précipitation est mauvaise conseillère. N’improvisons pas. Prenons le temps de mettre des balises claires», dit Mme De Courcy.

Le 11 juin dernier, la ministre de l’Éducation, Michelle Courchesne, a présenté son nouveau modèle de bulletin unique, qui fait plus de place à l’évaluation des connaissances. Mme Courchesne, qui souhaite que le bulletin fasse son entrée dès septembre dans les écoles, donnait jusqu’à la fin juillet aux commissions scolaires pour se prononcer.

Déjà, la Fédération des commissions scolaires du Québec a jugé irréaliste l’adoption du bulletin dès septembre et a demandé son report. Dans son avis envoyé au ministère de l’Éducation (MELS), la CSDM ne demande pas, quant à elle, le report du bulletin, mais exige des précisions.

Par exemple, puisque l’évaluation des élèves ne se fera plus par cycles, mais bien à chaque année, Mme De Courcy souhaite que le gouvernement établisse une pondération pour les quatre étapes de l’année. Elle aimerait que chaque étape ne représente pas 25% de la note finale, mais qu’une pondération évolutive soit plutôt adoptée. Cette pondération devrait être imposée à toutes les écoles de la province, afin de pouvoir comparer les résultats des élèves, tant du réseau public que privé, selon Mme De Courcy.

La CSDM souhaite également qu’une meilleure définition des compétences soit donnée, afin que leur évaluation soit bien comprise. Car même si plus de place sera accordée à l’évaluation des connaissances dans le bulletin, les compétences (concept introduit avec le Renouveau pédagogique) continueront d’être évaluées. «Le programme actuel est bon. Mais il doit être bien compris et bien évalué», croit Mme De Courcy, qui affirme que les nouveaux bulletins n’entraîneront pas seulement des «changements cosmétiques», mais également quelques modification au Programme de formation de l’école québécoise.

Mme De Courcy mentionne que le bulletin a longtemps été un «drame national» au Québec. «Ça a assez duré, dit-elle. Le bulletin est un outil de communication aux parents et il doit être clair. Avoir un bulletin unique aidera. Mais quelques modifications doivent d’abord être apportées.»

MONTREAL – Montreal Island school boards have rung up more than $217,000 in fines since a new city bylaw to attack the problem of false fire alarms went into effect last year.

The fines stem from 189 of the 406 [...]]]> New fire bylaw targets the mischievous

The Gazette     BRENDA BRANSWELL  GAZETTE EDUCATION REPORTER

MONTREAL – Montreal Island school boards have rung up more than $217,000 in fines since a new city bylaw to attack the problem of false fire alarms went into effect last year.

The fines stem from 189 of the 406 false alarms at the five island boards between February 2009 and this month. In 217 instances, it was a first false alarm and resulted only in a warning.

The Lester B. Pearson School Board objects to some of the charges levied under the bylaw. It has been hit with $15,300 in fines during that time period, according to the Montreal fire department.

“If we don’t maintain our equipment, I have no problem with that -we should be fined,” board chairperson Marcus Tabachnick said.

But he questioned whether school boards should be slapped with fines when mischief is at play.

“I’m not in any way looking for somehow to excuse a mischievous fire alarm,” Tabachnick said. “It’s a danger to everybody and it’s a cost to the city -I get it.

“I just don’t think it’s fair that school boards should have to pay that.”

The Pearson board passed a resolution in late April that has been sent to the four other Montreal Island boards, asking the city to change the bylaw “to eliminate any potential adverse effects” on the level of services the board offers students.

“Such fines far exceed the actual cost of the fire alarms to the city and therefore the school tax is being appropriated to subsidize municipal services,” the resolution reads.

Under the bylaw, schools and other high-risk properties receive a warning for the first false alarm, followed by an escalating series of fines -$250, $750 and $2,700 -for repeat incidents.

The bylaw was put in place to improve fire safety and vigilance, said Sylvain Carriere, an operations chief at the Montreal fire department. People no longer leave buildings when an alarm goes off because alarm systems aren’t maintained by owners, especially in structures that are subject to the building code and must have a system, Carriere said.

Another goal is to make sure firefighters and equipment are free to respond to real alarms and emergency medical calls.

Of the 406 unfounded fire alarms at Montreal Island school boards, 158 were due to defects in alarm system parts. “It could be a heat detector, it could be a smoke detector that was activated,” Carriere said.

The usual suspects -students -were presumably the culprits in some cases. There were 126 manual fire alarms that were set off in a mischievous way, Carriere said.

There are some discrepancies between the total fine amounts provided by the fire department and school boards. But the numbers show some boards have fared better than others. The English Montreal School Board has incurred more than $7,000 in fines for false alarms at seven schools. The steepest one was $2,758 for a false alarm at Laurier Macdonald High School on Jan. 21, the third such incident at the school in less than three months.

The Commission scolaire Marguerite Bourgeoys says it has received $53,800 in fines to date.

The Commission scolaire de la Pointe de l’Ile was hit with $32,371 in fines over the last school year -and $43,550 in total since February 2009, according to the fire department. The false alarms were sometimes due to work being done in a school or defects in the alarm system, said Christiane St. Onge, the board’s secretary-general and communications director.

The Pointe de l’Ile board, in the eastern and northeastern portions of the city, has received $14,000 from the fire department’s reimbursement program for property owners who want to improve their alarm systems, Carriere said. Property owners who have received at least one fine and paid it can apply to the fire department for a refund for part of the cost of installing or repairing the system that set off the false alarm.

Some schools have installed a box device on their manual alarms, which has reduced the number of false alarms from those stations by nearly 100 per cent, Carriere said. The device covers a manual fire alarm and will sound a local alarm, drawing attention to where the cover was lifted. A second action is required if the person really wants to activate the alarm. If other students are around, the culprit could get caught red-handed, Carriere added.

The Commission scolaire de Montreal, the province’s largest school board, has received $86,750 in fines. The CSDM launched an awareness campaign this past winter to inform students, parents and school staff about the bylaw. The board says it will seek $250 from a student or his or her parents each time a student is at fault for a false alarm.

bbranswell@thegazette.canwest.com
© Copyright (c) The Montreal Gazette

It costs more to be an anglophone in Laval this summer.

When school tax bills went out recently, homeowners affiliated with the English-language Sir Wilfrid Laurier School Board found themselves paying a higher tax rate.

Laurier board chairperson Steve [...]]]> French counterpart has discount rate because its tax base is larger

THE GAZETTE  Karen Seidman

It costs more to be an anglophone in Laval this summer.

When school tax bills went out recently, homeowners affiliated with the English-language Sir Wilfrid Laurier School Board found themselves paying a higher tax rate.

Laurier board chairperson Steve Bletas said yesterday he’s furious that the government has done nothing to correct the situation.

“It’s almost discriminatory,” he said. “The English are paying more and the French are paying less.”

He said the reason behind the inequality is that the Commission scolaire de Laval exceeded the maximum amount of tax revenue it can collect and, subsequently, was able to lower its rate to about 30 cents per $ 100 home evaluation. Sir Wilfrid Laurier’s rate has been set by the Education Department at 35 cents per $100 evaluation.

The Education Department sets a maximum amount school boards can keep from taxation. Those whose tax base is less than that amount are given an equalization grant to make up the difference, but in order to receive the grant the board must tax at the maximum rate of 35 cents. But boards with a tax base above that amount – such as the Commission scolaire de Laval – must reduce their rate so as to collect no more than the maximum tax allowed.

The board has sent a letter to Laval taxpayers apologizing for the situation and promising to keep pursuing it.

Although Bletas said the government has refused to do anything to equalize the situation, an aide to Education Minister Michelle Courchesne said yesterday that the matter is still being studied.

“I can’t say when an answer will come,” said Cédrick Beauregard, adding that school tax rates are based on a formula that takes into account many factors, such as size of territory, transportation, number of schools and number of students.

Bletas said there was a smaller discrepancy between the two boards’ tax rates last summer, which the government corrected. He said he believes it’s only fair for the ministry to take similar action this year.

“This is going to really hit hard,” Bletas said. “Neighbours will wonder why they are paying more taxes than the guy next door.”

The situation could be exacerbated by the fact that people who have a choice of which school board they want to be affiliated with might begin to choose the French-language board, which could further erode Sir Wilfrid Laurier’s tax base.

Anyone with children in school must pay taxes to the board they attend. But other Quebecers can choose the local board they want – and Bletas figures Sir Wilfrid Laurier’s higher taxes aren’t going to be too appealing.

For example, for a house valued at $400,000, taxes to the French board would be $969, but for the English board the amount would be $1,171 – a difference of $202.

Laval resident Sylvain Fréchette, who is chairperson of the governing board at English-language St. Vincent elementary school, said it makes no sense to him that all taxpayers don’t pay the same.

On the island of Montreal, a central body regulates the tax for all boards.

Fréchette said his in-laws have elected to pay school taxes to the English board because it’s where their grandchildren go, but he wouldn’t be surprised if they switched to the French board, along with a lot of other people.

“I realize it’s probably just math, but the principle behind it isn’t fair,” Fréchette said.