EOAAR - Questions & Answers

Questions and comments received from community members interested in the East Oxford Attendance Area Review (EOAAR) will be presented here, along with answers provided by TVDSB staff, for the information of East Oxford school communities.

Submit your questions or comments

Question #72: Hickson PS attendance has dropped to an all time low with the new boundary changes due to Turtle Island PS being constructed. Why is Hickson PS boundaries also not under review?

Boundaries for the east side of 11th line are being changed to Central PS. I would suggest that houses on the west side of the river still attend Hickson PS as it would keep them in their community and the other side of the street still attend Hickson PS. Bussing is already in place for the street. Although 11th line is technically part of Woodstock boundaries, they are separated by a river and live on a country road. Central PS is set up for a suburban community and not a rural community while those on 11th line live in a rural community.

Currently, many of the families on 11th line have out of area exemptions to attend Hickson PS but only for one year. Central PS will get an increase in attendance in the 2027-2028 school year if the boundary is not reviewed for Hickson PS as well. This change would be a small catchment change for Hickson PS but would keep 11th line in their community.

Response #72: The underutilization at Hickson can be revisited in the future. Our immediate focus in this review
is to resolve the overcapacity at East Oxford Central.

Questions and responses #71:

How many classes would be eliminated or combined? How would class sizes be affected? How many teachers and support staff would be lost?

Staffing and school organization (class sizes, splits, etc.) for the start of any school year are not determined until late Spring the previous year, as specific demographics, distribution of students, and specific student needs are subject to change.

Which programs (like music, literacy support, or extracurriculars) would no longer be viable?

No programs will be discontinued as a result of the potential attendance area changes; curricular and extracurricular programs will exist proportionate to the number and interests of students and the availability of staff to volunteer to support extracurricular activities.

Regarding all of the above questions, it should be noted that the proposed boundary changes result in near capacity enrolment at East Oxford Central, which is conducive to ongoing viability of programming. 

How much funding would the school lose under the Ontario Ministry of Education model?

School budget allocations vary from year to year. At present, they depend on the board-wide total student enrolment and are allocated to each school in proportion to its enrolment.

Questions and responses #70:

We would like to see raw data sets used to generate enrolment projections, including historical enrolment data, birth rate data, housing development projections, cohort survival ratios, and student yield factors?

For residential development projections, we analyze the number and types of housing units and apply student yield rates based on comparable developments that have already been completed. These yields are calculated using the actual number of students generated by those developments and are used to project the potential number of students from future developments. The projected student numbers are then distributed over several years. Below are the student yield assumptions for Emily Stowe PS and Central PS.

For example, if there was a new development of 100 single detached units, using the yield below we would project approximately 26 students.

• Oxford South Single Family Units - 0.2660
• Oxford Townhouse Units - .2452
• High Density Units - 0.0148

Below are the number of students we are projecting from new developments that are planned within the Emily Stowe and Central Attendance Areas.

• A progression factor of below 1 reflects a decrease in students ( ex. 0.96 = - 4%)
• A progression factor of above 1 reflects an increase in students from one grade to the next
• A progression factor of 1 reflects no change in student numbers between grades

Progression Factors for East Oxford Central

East Oxford Central PS

East Oxford Central Enrolment Projections

We are wondering what the year operational costs are for each of the three schools per year?

• East Oxford Central PS: $7.70 per square foot
• Emily Stowe PS: $8.89 per square foot
• Central PS: $7.66 per square foot

The projected increase in enrolment between 2026 and 2032 is based on historical enrolment trends. Above is a breakdown of the progression factors that were used to develop the projections for East Oxford Central. No significant housing development is planned within the East Oxford Central  Attendance Area.

What data do you use to support the assumption of this in-migration of young families? Do you analyze recent home sales in this catchment to determine the age and family composition of incoming buyers? What housing supply and affordability mechanism supports the in-migration of these families?

We do not use recent home sales for our projections; we use our enrolment data from the previous years to forecast enrolment for future years. Between 2017 and 2023, enrolment at East Oxford Central PS increased by approximately 80 students. This growth was largely the result of turnover of existing dwellings and an increase in the number of new residents in the area.

In the past two years, enrolment has remained steady given the slowdown in the housing market. Based on historical trends, we anticipate that over time student numbers at East Oxford Central PS will continue to increase.

What specific change in the underlying assumptions would cause the projected growth not to materialize?

We use a program called School Planning Software to support accommodation planning work. We utilize birth data, student progression rates from grade to grade, international student registrations, and student yields from new developments. Together, these inputs are used to generate enrolment projections. If there were significant change in one or more of the above factors, it could have an impact on enrolment projections.

Below is the time range for which data is available:

Questions and responses #69:

1. What is TVDSB's 10-year plan for each of the three schools involved in the review? 

This approach ensures that limited and variable funding is directed to the highest priority needs at any given time. For context, renewal investments at each of the three schools over the past five years are outlined below.  

Question #68: If students from East Oxford Central PS are assigned to Emily Stowe PS, will the school be expanded?

Responses #68: If students are assigned to Emily Stowe from East Oxford Central , approximately two portables would be required based on current projections. Building additions typically consist of a minimum of six classrooms. Enrolment would continue to be monitored and TVDSB would seek capital funding from the Ministry of Education for a building addition as soon as it is required.

Questions and responses #67:

1. Have you ever moved 1/3 of the school population in an AAR? 

2. What program/process do you use to get the projected enrollments?

3. What are our birth rates for East Oxford Central Public School area?

4. What percentage of birth rates is used to project enrolment at East Oxford Central Public School compared to a school attendance area without similar competing factors, such as private schools and Christian Reformed schools?

5. How many kids go to East Oxford Central Public School that live North of Townerline Road and from West of County Road 4 on Towerline Road? 

6. Can we have the current enrollment and the project enrollment for next year at Central Public School as well as Emily Stowe Public School?

Central:

2025-2026 (current year) – 311

2026-2027 (projection) – 293

Emily Stowe:

2025-2026 (current year)  – 596

2026-2027 (projection)  – 587

Question #66: The review states: “The catalyst for this review is a combination of the growing enrolment and the limitation of the size of the existing septic system at East Oxford Central PS…Based on professional assessments, regulatory requirements, and cost analysis, expanding the septic system is not a feasible solution. An attendance area review is thus necessary in order to manage enrolment at the school.”

In the supporting septic report, the option of a tertiary treatment system is identified, with an estimated construction cost of approximately $1.5M to $3M and noted operational considerations, including the need for a licensed operator and ongoing annual costs.

While these considerations are important, I would appreciate clarification on why this option appears to have been effectively discounted as a viable solution.

In particular, other rural schools—such as Lambton Centennial—have recently implemented tertiary systems, reportedly at a lower capital cost, suggesting that this approach can be both feasible and practical in a school setting.

With that in mind:

• How was the feasibility of a tertiary system ultimately assessed in this case, given that it was identified but not advanced?
• What specific factors (e.g., site conditions, regulatory constraints, operational concerns) led to the conclusion that it could not be pursued as a viable alternative?
• How were the capital and operational costs of a tertiary system weighed against the broader financial and student-impact costs associated with proceeding to an attendance area review?

Understanding this is important, as the conclusion that septic expansion is not feasible is being used as the primary basis for boundary changes. Given the potential implications for students—including transportation, school transitions, and overall welfare—I would appreciate further detail on how all reasonably available infrastructure options were evaluated before reaching that conclusion.

Response #66: Tertiary treatment comes with a significantly higher capital and operational cost and would require operation by a licensed operator, which the TVDSB does not have on staff. Estimated construction cost for this type of system is $1.5M to $3M, with annual operating costs of $150k to $250k subject to Ministry of the Environment, Conservation and Parks reporting and testing requirements. It is possible that land acquisition may also be required for a tertiary system. This option is complex in nature and given the infrequent flows experienced at school sites (no weekend flows, no summer flows), the ability for the system to operate effectively and meet regulatory effluent requirements could be a challenge. 

Question #65: Currently, for the 2025–2026 school year, East Oxford is operating at 10.4% above its capacity of 317 students. I understand that there are no known issues with the septic system at the school.

Could you clarify how the Stantec report accounts for wastewater flow in a school setting? Specifically, is it possible to obtain a detailed breakdown of the methodology and calculations used? I’m interested in understanding how factors such as intermittent toilet use and handwashing—limited to certain portions of the day—were incorporated into the analysis.

Having this level of detail would help ensure a clear understanding of the assumptions behind the numbers, rather than relying on figures that may be overstated if these usage patterns were not fully considered.

Response #65: Stantec utilized comparable water usage data at other schools. We have also installed a water meter on our well to track water consumption. This allows us to understand the loading on the septic system. The full detailed report contains all the calculations and assumptions on actual water usage. 

Question #64: When was the last time a city-based school was closed? You can understand why we're concerned about a proposal to remove one-third of our student population based on uncertain projections that have drastically changed in a matter of a year (from the 2025 acomodation plan) rather than firm data. From our perspective, this creates a high-risk scenario: if the anticipated growth does not materialize and enrolment instead declines, rural schools could be left vulnerable to future closure.

BOTH of the communities you are proposing to shift have already experienced the loss of their local schools not long ago due to TEMPORARY enrolment shifts (Sweaburg Public School and North Norwich Public School in Burgessville) That history only heightens our concern.

If the anticipated growth does not materialize, what specific, pre-defined actions will you commit to taking to ensure our school is not placed at risk of closure/consolidation when our population inevitably decreases again with the demographic shift?

Response #64: Fairmont PS, was a city-based school located in London, closed in June 2022. East Oxford Central is not under review to be closed. If the current projections do not materialize, we will revise them as needed and adjust our planning accordingly.

Question #63:  Why does the current attendance area only consider 3 schools? What are the current and projected capacities of other schools in Woodstock and why aren't they being considered?

Children that currently have spots in the before and after school program at East Oxford may not have the same opportunity for before and after school at Central Public School. The before and after school programs are operated by different companies. How does Thames Valley plan to address the issue that East Oxford Students may not have before and after school care if they are forced to attend Central?

What additional safe guards are in place at Central to ensure the safety of children given the high population of homelessness and addiction in the downtown core?

Response #63: The Board does not directly operate these programs and cannot guarantee placement. We are committed to facilitating ongoing discussions with service providers and sharing information with families as it becomes available. Families will be encouraged to connect directly with the operators to explore care options.

Question #62: When proposing these boundary changes, have the established secondary school pathways been factored into the decision-making? Currently, students in the East Oxford catchment and the majority from Emily Stowe continue to CASS, while all of Central students feed into WCI. Under the proposed changes, students redirected to Central would be required to integrate into a new school community across town, only to face a second disruption when transitioning to a different secondary pathway than their new peers. Has an analysis been completed on the cumulative impact on these dual transitions to student well-being?

Response #62: The well-being of our students is our number one concern and was taken into consideration when developing our options. Each option was evaluated to ensure it supports student safety and overall well-being. Whichever option is approved, a transition committee will be put in place to help students manage and adjust to the proposed changes.

Question #61: Could you please provide a detailed explanation of the full calculation methodology and underlying assumptions used to project the student population increases at East Oxford—specifically, the 7.1% increase (25 students) for 2027 and the 10.7% increase (40 students) for 2032?

These projections seem inconsistent with historical trend averages, especially in light of the decline over the past two years. It would be nice to see what is currently enrolled for next year as a tentative number. I would appreciate a detailed breakdown of how these figures were developed, including a clear explanation of how COVID-19 impacts were addressed and removed from the analysis, as well as how factors such as the large Dutch community and the prevalence of homeschooling in our area were taken into account.

Response #61: Enrollment growth at East Oxford Central began around 2017. Growth during the COVID period remained consistent with pre‑pandemic trends, with continued increases through the later stages of the pandemic (2022–2023).

Our projections are based on three main elements, each of which is explained below.

Number of Births

We receive birth registry data each year, organized by the number of births within each school boundary. Using this information, we review the number of births and, based on historical trends, project the number of Junior Kindergarten students forecasted to enroll at each school once the children reach school age

Progression Rates

We look at past patterns of how students move from one grade to the next, tracking how each group tends to grow or shrink over time. This helps us get a clearer picture of what future enrollment might look like.

Residential Development Yield

When residential development is proposed within a school’s attendance boundary, we review the number and types of housing units planned and apply a student yield based on recent, comparable developments in the area. For example, if past developments produced 25 students from 100 units, that yield ratio is applied to future proposed developments.

Question #60: Is there a detailed breakdown of attendance at East Oxford by grade? Which grades are currently causing excess enrollment rates? How do the class sizes compare to other TVDSB schools in Woodstock? Are there other TVDSB schools with septic tanks? What is the capacity of their septic tanks compared to school enrollment?

Response #60:

The Ministry standard for class sizes range from 26 students for JK/SK and 23 students for grade 1 through 8. Several schools rely on septic systems, the conditions at East Oxford differ from those at other sites.

Question #59: As I was looking at the AARC member requirements from March 2nd I see that you are looking to have “Two (2) parent/caregiver representatives of a student living in a holding zone that is being accommodated at the school involved in the review (Central PS only).” Why Central PS school only? Why not the parents of children that may have to attend Emily Stowe? Can you explain this, as it seems very unfair

Response #59: The holding zone at Central has now been dissolved following the opening of Turtle Island. However, we must continue to adhere to the Attendance Area Review (AAR) procedure, which outlines how committee members are selected, how representation is managed throughout the process. It also ensures that parents and guardians from each affected school are included in the review.

Question #58: The septic report for EOS indicates that it can accommodate 252 students. What is the student capacity of the Hickson and Zorra Highland septic systems and what is their current enrolment after Turtle Island students have moved on?

Response #58: For schools on private sewage services, one of the factors that determines school capacity to accommodate students is the size of the septic system. The septic systems at Hickson Central PS and Zorra Highland Park PS are able to accommodate the enrolment at each school.

Question #57: The Septic System Review appears to focus primarily on system capacity and regulatory compliance. However, it does not address the anticipated service life or remaining lifespan of the existing septic system.

Given that the system was installed in approximately 1995 and is therefore about 31 years old, can you confirm whether age related deterioration or end of life considerations may reasonably be expected to present issues in the near future, independent of whether the school is operating within its design capacity?
While the report notes that the school population has exceeded the system’s design capacity in the past with no known performance issues to date, it does not discuss what routine inspection, maintenance, or other activities have been undertaken over the life of the system.
As such, there may be additional risk factors unrelated to capacity—such as system age, component condition, or maintenance history—that could affect ongoing performance or future reliability. Is any information available regarding these factors, or has any assessment of system condition or remaining service life been conducted?

Response #57: Septic systems would have a relatively long service life, yearly routine maintenance is completed. Based on the most recent reviews replacement of the system is not anticipated in the near future. Yearly preventative maintenance is completed that reviews components of the system. Repairs are completed as required based on the preventative maintenance reviews.

Question #56: Was a septic system evaluation conducted at Zorra and Hickson before adding portables and accommodating the increased student population?

Based on the Ontario Building Code limits for septic systems, what is the approved daily flow capacity at Hickson, and how has the school been permitted to accommodate a student population that appears to exceed typical thresholds?

Response #56: Before adding portables to a school, consultants are retained to submit a building permit application which includes meeting all applicable Ontario Building Code requirements. This was completed at both schools.

Question #55: Between the accommodation review from last year and the current Area Review, what changes in data or methodology led to the projected increase of approximately 55 students at East Oxford? Can the Board provide the specific source or evidence for these additional students, given the short timeframe?

Response #55: Our methodology for developing projections has not changed. East Oxford Central was not included in an attendance review last year and is only part of this current review.

Question #54: It appears that the Stantec engineer may have limited experience with tertiary septic systems. Have you consulted directly with engineers, suppliers, or installers who specialize in these systems to better understand their functionality, feasibility, and actual costs?

There are several schools within the Peel Region and Lambton-Kent region that successfully utilize tertiary septic systems when a large system is needed and soil conditions are not ideal for traditional systems. This suggests that viable, real-world solutions exist and raises the question of whether all reasonable alternatives have been fully or reasonably explored before drawing conclusions.

Response #54: Stantec is a qualified multi-disciplinary consulting firm with extensive expertise in the design of wastewater systems. TVDSB does not currently operate any tertiary septic systems. A tertiary system comes with significantly higher capital and operating costs and would require operation by a licensed operator, which the TVDSB does not have on staff.

Question #53: What is the primary objective of this attendance review? More specifically, is the intention to bring East Oxford School’s enrollment below the stated OTG capacity of 317, even though this does not appear to align with the septic report’s capacity of 252 occupants?

Response #53: The intent of the attendance area review is to ensure that the school’s long-term enrolment does not necessitate the need for any additional portables as this would require an expansion to the septic system for which there is currently insufficient site space given soil conditions.

Question #52: The septic report includes several daily-use assumptions, given that a school day does not represent full-day occupancy—have these factors been properly considered?

Response #52: Yes.

Question #51: How was the 317 OTG capacity calculated?

Response #51: The On-the-Ground capacity is calculated based on the number of classrooms and other spaces in each school. Each space has a different capacity in accordance with Ministry of Education standards.

Question #50: Would it be possible for Nelson Oliveira to attend a meeting and provide a more detailed explanation of the septic system report?

Response #50: Please submit any additional questions regarding the septic report and we would be pleased to provide answers in consultation with Stantec.

Question #49: Has TVDSB taken into consideration the mental health strain that this potential move to Central PS would have on our children? 

Response #49: Our number one concern is the well-being of our students. The reason for this review is the combination of the septic system and enrolment pressures at the school. We want to avoid a situation where there could be health and/or safety disruptions at East Oxford. Should any proposed option be approved, a transition committee will be established to support families and students throughout the move to another school.

Question #48: During the meeting on April 1st you said extra information would be posted on your website. A question was asked what was the projected numbers for East Oxford for 2026/27 school year, information you didn’t have at the meeting. Where can I find this information, or can it be posted please?

Response #48: We are projecting approximately 359 students at East Oxford Central for the 2026/27 school year.

Question #47: There are rumours that in 5-10 years there are plans to close East Oxford. The fact that TVDSB does not want to put money into buying the neighbouring field and enlarging the septic, this rumour is concerning. There was also mention about a new school possibly being built in 5-10 years in the north end of Woodstock, with concerns of closing EO and moving students. Please speak to this concern, as families do not want to have to go through this again.

Response #47: There are no plans to close East Oxford Central.

Question #46: Given the significant projected enrollment shift to Central, if the expected decrease in local enrollment does not occur, how will the Board manage the excess students? What safeguards exist to prevent over-reliance on portables, which would further restrict limited play areas and impact student well-being?

Response #46: In the past, Central has operated with an enrollment exceeding 500 students and has done so successfully. During those periods, the school demonstrated its ability to support a larger student population while maintaining a positive learning environment. Should enrollment increase beyond Central’s capacity, the Board will make the necessary adjustments to ensure that learning conditions and safety are not compromised.

Question #45: A key concern with the Board's enrollment projections is the reliance on cohort survival rates, which are inherently backward-looking. While this method reflects historical trends, it does not adequately account for current or emerging demographic shifts within our community. Our area has recently experienced declining-enrollment, which may not yet be fully reflected in cohort progression data. As a result, projections based heavily on past patterns risk overstating future enrollment if those trends do not continue. In a community that is clearly "breathing," it is critical that projections incorporate real-time indicators such as current registration data, local housing realities, and recent enrollment declines, rather than relying predominantly on historical averages and trends. How can the Board be confident in projections that appear to assume continued growth, despite clear evidence of recent enrollment declines and a community that is actively "breathing"?

Response #45: The projections reflect historical enrollment growth of approximately 80 students. They are not a fixed forecast, and the Board will make adjustments as new data and changing trends emerge.

Question #44: Re: question #23, can you please indicate how many JK registrations EOS had at this same time last year as compared to September 2025? I suspect a school such as EOS traditionally does have most registrations in place at this time as its population as supported by real estate data doesn't change much.

Response #44: Around this time last year, there were approximately 30 JK students registered.

Question #43: I suspect a traffic impact study would normally be required when a new school is built with this level of transportation demand, what equivalent transportation safety analysis has been conducted before assigning over 100 additional bused students to an existing constrained site?

Response #43: At this time, a transportation analysis has not been completed because no option has been approved. Once an option is approved, we will work with the municipality to determine whether a transportation analysis is required

Question #42: Does the addition of 101 students and their buses in Central Public School meet the board’s own planning standards for accommodating a bused student population in a NEW school?

Response #42: Yes, Central has previously accommodated a student population higher than what is projected in this attendance area review.

Question #41: Has the City of Woodstock been consulted with the plan to permanently increase the traffic patterns in this site?

Response #41: We consulted with the City of Woodstock before completing the initial Attendance Area Review report.

Question #40: Do you have historical data to back up other AARs where your projections actually materialized into what was suspected versus substantially more or substantially less as has been pointed out in several examples given through the questions?

Response #40: We aim to be as accurate as possible with our projections, based on the information available at the time. Central was previously part of another review, and our projections then showed that enrollment would increase. This was before two major changes affected our numbers: a shift in federal policy and a decline in residential construction. These factors resulted in lower enrollment than originally expected.

Question #39: In question 9 that was submitted, somebody asked how you explain the discrepancy between your projections for Central during the previous attendance review and your projections now just a short few years later. The concern here is that your previous projections supported the overall goal of the last change and these “new” (and very different) projections support the overall desire to lessen the population at East Oxford. Huge discrepancies of this nature in a short period certainly plant a seed of doubt in terms of the legitimacy of your data. Who other than the “we” that you keep referring to reviews the data you’re using? Without trustees in place, it does not seem fair that decisions of this nature can be made without representation on our behalf. While I realize that the AARC is being created and will be in place, it still appears that the data and information being used to support the suggested options may be skewed in favour of the board’s ultimate goal. Is there a neutral party that reviews the information and aids in mediating this process?

Response #39: The projections for this attendance area review were prepared by the Planning Department and reviewed by our superintendents. Approval to proceed with this attendance area review was provided by the TVDSB Supervisor.

Question #38: At the first meeting about proposed boundary changes, it was asked about "grandfathering" in families already attending EOPS. It was stated that TVDSB doesn't frequently do this, because they don't like to end up with neighbours going to different schools. How was the proposed boundary through the Sweaburg community planned then? The village of Sweaburg was cut out from the village extension on Dodge line. This essentially splits up the neighbourhood, changes before and after care for many parents, and divides families and established friends.

Response #38: We considered placing the boundary split line south of Sweaburg Rd, but ultimately decided against it to limit the number of students proposed to be reassigned to Central PS. If you would like us to revisit this option, you are welcome to bring the suggestion forward to your Attendance Area Review Committee and we can revisit it as we begin work on the final Attendance Area Review report.

Question #37: TVDSB states the ultimate reasoning for this boundary review is to ease the strain on the septic system at EOPS, which TVDSB stated the system is currently operating with no issues. If this is the case, why doesn’t TVDSB considering having the septic tank pumped when getting at capacity as it did VERY frequently during times at the Hickson public school which was over capacity for a long time while waiting for Turtle Island to open?

Response #37: The system at East Oxford PS is currently operating without any known issues. While pumping septic tanks can be used as a temporary measure while system upgrades are being planned or completed, as was done at Hickson Public School, it does not increase the system's treatment capacity. As such, pumping is not a viable solution to support additional population or portables, as this would exceed the system's capacity. 

Question #36: How does East oxford differ from other schools on septic systems (ie Hickson and Zorra) who have added several portables? What criteria were applied differently?

Response #36: The population of a school on septic is limited by the approved design capacity of its septic system and tile bed. The ability to add portables is dependent on site-specific servicing capacity, and reflects constraints unique to each location.

Question #35: How is the TVDSB comfortable with the Homeless and Addiction Recovery Hub opening 70 m from Central public school. You mention that there is supervision in place to ensure student safety at drop off and outdoor time, I find it hard to ensure students are not exposed to witnessing homelessness and drug activity with this extremely close proximity to the school. Many parents have taken previous measures to ensure their children didn’t have to attend Central Public school due to these issues. Why was this location for the HART hub approved by TVDSB when student well being is to be the forefront ?

Response #35: The Oxford Homelessness and Addiction Recovery Treatment (HART) facility on Graham Street was approved by the City of Woodstock and Oxford County, not by TVDSB. If you would like to know more about how they support safety within the community, you can visit: https://www.woodstockhospital.ca/oxford-hart-hub-initiative/

Question #34: Can you provide a sensitivity analysis showing how enrollment projections change under low-growth or no-growth scenarios? What are the implications for the school and its students if the projected growth does not materialize?

Response #34: Should area trends shift, we will revise our projections as needed and identify the most suitable course of action.

Question #33: You've stated that enrollment growth is being driven by demographic turnover in existing housing. Can you provide evidence that this type of growth has been sustained over multiple cycles (10+ years) in comparable rural communities with no development, rather than representing a temporary enrollment bubble?

Response #33: We do not yet have a 10‑plus‑year cycle for comparison, as most of the growth we’ve experienced has occurred within the past decade. However, a number of schools in our district have experienced growth despite limited new development, and East Oxford Central is among them.

Question #32: Why is TVDSB, not looking at the current enrollments of schools located in Woodstock, and then shifting some of those students out of Southdale – which would free up spots for EOPS students to attend there vs bussing them across town. Which in regards to question 17 – you state a decline in Central’s enrollment…then why would you not adjust the school boundaries within the City and move Woodstock residents to Central and at least free up spaces for the schools located on the south side of the city – which is reduced kms for bussing.

Response #32: The primary purpose of this review is not to increase enrolment at Central, but to relieve capacity pressures at East Oxford Central caused by septic system limitations. We examined several schools in Woodstock that might help reduce the strain on East Oxford Central PS. Many of these schools were already operating near or above their capacity or lacked sufficient space to place portables on site.

Question #31: Why does the current attendance area only consider 3 schools? what are the current and projected capacities of other schools in Woodstock and why aren't they being considered?

Question #31: After reviewing a number of schools, we found that each was either above capacity or very close to it. We decided on using either Central PS or Emily Stowe as both schools have the space available to alleviate the pressure at East Oxford Central PS. 

Question #30: What additional safe guards are in place at Central to ensure the safety of children given the high population of homelessness and addiction in the downtown core?

Response #30: Central PS, like all TVDSB schools, maintains a strong focus on student safety through consistent, proactive supervision practices that are embedded in the daily operation of the school.  Staff provide active supervision across the school grounds, with particular attention during arrival, dismissal, recess, and throughout the instructional day.

Clear supervision is in place at designated bus drop‑off and pick‑up areas to support safe and orderly transitions to and from school. These routines are well established and supported by staff presence and clear expectations for students.

The school yard is fully enclosed, creating a defined and secure outdoor learning and play space for students. Exterior doors are locked during instructional time.  The physical layout of the school site, combined with intentional staff supervision, supports a safe, welcoming environment for all students while on school property.

Question #29: To extend from my previous question about future growth. Why not deal this the septic capacity now instead of moving kids to another school when those school will be needing the space with the future growth? Turtle Island is already at capacity and will be sending kids from their area to Central public school.

Response #29: There isn't enough space to permit an expansion of the septic system to the capacity required to support the school’s enrollment.

Question #28: Have you guys looked into purchasing more land from the neighbouring property? Oxford County is currently doing a Community Growing planning report and the growth they are projecting is crazy. By 2031 they are projecting Woodstock to be at 60000, Norwich at 14200, so why are we going to move kids to one of those schools that will need to spacing in the near future.

Response #28: We have not contacted the owner of the neighbouring property. At this time, we are aware of the long term projections for Oxford County. This attendance area review is somewhat different from others, as we are proposing to reassign students due to septic capacity limitations rather than to increase enrollment at underutilized schools.

Question #27: The current Attendance Area Review only provides enrollment projections for three schools, despite the board acknowledging that most other schools in Woodstock are already at or over capacity with no room for expansion. Given the city’s rapid and ongoing growth, why is the board considering overfilling a Woodstock school with rural students not even in city limits? Would it not be more practical to reserve that space for students living closer to the school whose currently designated schools are already full? This approach appears to prioritize short-term enrollment balancing over long-term stability for students and the community. It will undoubtedly be detrimental to student success and student well-being.

Response #27: We reviewed the option of using other schools to alleviate enrolment pressure at East Oxford Central and determined that both Central and Emily Stowe are proximal to the affected area and have capacity to accommodate a substantial number of students.
This approach is intended to address current pressures while placing students in nearby schools that can support additional enrollment.

Question #26: You note in one of your answers that you are projecting enrollment to increase as housing turnover rises. Could you explain what data or market indicators the board has used to project an increase in housing turnover in this area? Have you surveyed the homeowners in the area or local realtors that know the area well?

Response #26: No, we have not surveyed homeowners or local realtors. For our enrollment projections we use a combination of multi-year enrolment patterns, JK intake vs. prior birth counts, and the addition of new addresses within the attendance area, which provides insight into whether new households are entering our school system.

Question #25: It is widely recognized that enrollment increases caused by demographic shifts within existing housing—particularly in the absence of new development—are typically temporary fluctuations rather than indicators of sustained long-term growth. Could you explain which data sets or evidence were used to conclude that this represents long-term growth, given that there are no new developments planned in the area?

Response #25: First, we examine multi year enrolment patterns rather than isolated changes. When enrolment increases steadily over several years and across multiple grade levels, this may indicate a broader change in the school aged population rather than a temporary fluctuation.

Second, we review cohort progression by looking at how groups of students move through the school over time. As part of this analysis, we use annual birth registry data, which is organized by the number of births within each school boundary. This information allows us to track local birth trends and, using historical patterns, project the number of Junior Kindergarten students expected to register at each school.

Question #24: In regards to your response for question #9. How long ago was the attendance review projections of growth you're speaking to in regards to CPS and Turtle Island?

How can we be confident in your forecast for EOPS when your forecast was clearly significantly wrong with the projections for CPS. How do projections change so much, in this amount of time?

Response #24: The Oxford North review was based on the 2022 enrolment projections. Given current trends, we anticipate that enrollment at East Oxford will continue to align with our projections. If there are changes to housing activity or policy direction, we will adjust our projections accordingly.

Question #23: As of today, how many students have registered for Junior Kindergarten for the upcoming school year, and how does that figure compare with the projected JK enrolment used by the board when developing this plan? If actual JK registrations are already trending below projections, why is the board proceeding with a plan based on enrolment growth that has not materialized?

Response #23: There are 21 Junior Kindergarten registrations for the upcoming school year at East Oxford Central PS. It is important to note that this does not represent the final intake, as the majority of JK registrations typically occur during the summer months.

We are also trying to be proactive in our long‑term planning to ensure the school’s infrastructure particularly the septic system can support future enrollment once projected number materialize.

Question #22: Will the new septic not be increased to support more students?  

Response #22: Unfortunately, expanding the septic system is not an option. Through this review, we are aiming to reduce enrollment pressure at East Oxford to prevent potential issues in the future. As part of this approach, we are proposing to designate portions of the East Oxford attendance area to nearby schools that are both proximal and have sufficient capacity.

Question #21: Referring to an early question regarding the Bower Hill Subdivision, what is the current attendance percentage at Eastdale Public school and the projected attendance for the next 5 years with the new Bower Hill subdivision utilizing that school?

Response #21:

Below are the projections for Eastdale PS: 

Question #20: Given the proposal to redirect students to Central Public School, I have serious concerns regarding the safety of young children arriving and departing from the school.

The existing bus loading area appears to accommodate only two buses at a time. If over 100 redirected students require transportation, this raises several questions:

1. Where will the additional buses load and unload students?
2. How will the board ensure the safety of very young children if buses must stage elsewhere or load in areas not designed for school transportation?

Additionally, there is the very real issue of frequent bus cancellations, which regularly occur across the region. When buses are cancelled, parents will be required to drive their children to school.

If approximately 101 additional students are redirected to this site, that could easily result in 50 or more additional vehicles attempting to drop off or pick up students during already congested arrival and dismissal periods in the downtown core.

Therefore:

• Where will these vehicles safely queue?
• How will traffic be managed to prevent congestion and unsafe conditions for all?
• What specific safety measures will be implemented to protect students entering and leaving the school grounds?

I suspect a traffic impact study would normally be required when a new school is built with this level of transportation demand, what equivalent transportation safety analysis has been conducted before assigning over 100 additional bused students to an existing constrained site?

Does the addition of 101 students and their buses in Central Public School meet the board’s own planning standards for accommodating a bused student population in a new school?

Has the City of Woodstock been consulted with the plan to permanently increase the traffic patterns in this site?

Based on the current configuration of the site, it appears that Central Public School was not designed to accommodate a large bused population or the associated vehicle traffic. As such, it is difficult to see how this proposal can be implemented without creating significant safety risks for students, their parents and the staff of this site.

Response #20:  Prior to February Central PS used 5 regular school buses and 2 Spec Trans vehicles, below is the process they used.

On the West side of our school (Light Street) there is a designated bus loading and unloading zone.  The buses pull into that area, unload and the students walk on the sidewalk and enter through the gates on the West and North sides of the school.  

At dismissal time, the bus students cue in designate lines for each bus. They load each bus one by one, in the same bus loading/unloading zone. Both of these processes are supported and supervised by staff.

The bus loading zone can fit up to 4 buses at one time. 

The whole process for 5 buses takes us about 5 minutes a long as the buses are on time. 

The Spec Trans buses use the parking lot on our school property, which is on the East side of the school. They pull into the lot, and the students are supporting in the loading/unloading of the buses. 

Parents who drop their children off park their vehicle in designated parking lots, or on the street.  They then walk their children (depending on age) to the designated drop off/pick up gate on the West and North sides of the school.

Question #19: When looking at actual numbers of home sales in the entire East Oxford School zoned area; The Real Estate data shows an approximate 36% decrease in homes sold when comparing the past five years to the five years prior. Given this decline, could you clarify what data supports the statement that new families are moving into existing homes, particularly considering that the available census data is also outdated?

Response #19: Over the past couple of years, there has been a general slowdown in local growth activity, and this trend is reflected in our historical enrollment patterns. Between 2017 and 2023, enrolment at East Oxford Central PS increased by approximately 80 students. This growth was largely the result of turnover within existing homes and an increase in the number of new residences in the area.

In the past two years, however, enrollment has remained steady, aligning with the broader slowdown in community activity. As turnover in local housing increases, we anticipate that student numbers at East Oxford Central PS will also increase.

Question #18: The 2032 enrollment projections for East Oxford are highly speculative. With no new developments approved and no recent census data, what reliable way do you have to track the current and future family demographics? Given that the 2032 JK cohort has not yet been born or conceived and current estimates are premature and lack a factual foundation.

In light of your assessment regarding the “shifting demographics” within the East Oxford catchment area, I would appreciate a more detailed explanation of the data used to support this conclusion. Given that the enrollment has stabilized/declined over the past 3 years and the 2032 projections involve children not yet born, the last census update was in 2021 and there are no approved developments in the area, I am seeking clarification on the specific metrics and sources used to quantify these projected trends.

Response #18: We receive birth registry data each year, organized by the number of births within each school boundary. Using this information, we review the number of births and, based on historical trends, project the number of Junior Kindergarten students expected to register at each school.

We also look at past patterns of how students move from one grade to the next, tracking how each group tends to grow or shrink over time. This helps us get a clearer picture of what future enrollment might look like.

Question #17: In your report you state that Central’s enrollment is projected to decrease due to the opening of Turtle Island. However, according to the decisions made during the North Woodstock Attendance Area Review, this was a one time student move with only Grade 8 students grandfathered and a legacy clause in place for their siblings for the remainder of the year. Could you explain how enrollment is projected to continue declining beyond the end of this school year?

Response #17: Although there is new development occurring within the Central Attendance Area, much of it consists of high‑density housing, which typically yields fewer school‑aged children. As a mature neighbourhood, overall enrollment in the Central area is projected to continue declining. As students graduate, they are not being replaced by an equivalent number of younger students entering the system. 

Question #16: How many buses currently service Central Public School? If an additional 2-3 buses were added, where would these buses be able to park for student loading and unloading? Given the school’s downtown location in a largely non-residential area with VERY limited parking and loading zones, what measures would be put in place to ensure the safety and well-being of students during bus arrival and departure time?

Response #16: Prior to February, five buses served Central PS. If Option 2 is approved, an additional two buses would be required. The same procedures previously in place will continue to be followed if the fleet increases.

Question #15: What percentage of student withdrawal from TVDSB is assumed in your boundary change modeling, and how does your plan change if families instead choose private, Catholic, or homeschooling options?

Response #15: If parents decide to explore different schooling options, we will make the necessary adjustments to our projections to reflect any changes in enrollment

Question #14: Should Option 2 be selected by the board: Given the frequency of snow days, fog days and bus cancellation days– when students are instead driven to school by parents–how does the board plan to manage the potential influx of an additional 50-80 vehicles at Central Public school with its downtown/commercial location? What traffic management measures will be implemented to ensure student safety while also preventing congestion and disruption to businesses in the downtown core, where parking and loading zones are already limited?

Response #14: To address this, the Board would work closely with our Traffic Safety partners, including municipal transportation staff, school administrators, and Student Transportation Services to develop a traffic management plan that prioritizes student safety. 

Question #13: The current attendance area review only provides projections for three schools, while the board has already acknowledged that most other Woodstock schools are over capacity with no room for expansion. Given Woodstock’s rapid and continuous growth, why are we debating overfilling a Woodstock school that will clearly reach a critical space deficit and could be better used to fill with students in the city within closer proximity when their currently designated school is over full? This approach seems to majorly prioritize short term numbers over long term stability for our students and community.

What is the cost of doing a boundary review? These solutions seem to be short term solutions which will result in another boundary review needing to be done in the very near future. Is the school closing forecasted?

Response #13: The purpose of the current attendance area review is not to close a school, but to manage the enrolment pressure caused by the limited septic capacity at East Oxford Central. Because of this constraint, we need to reduce the number of students at the school to make sure it can operate safely and sustainably.

While any boundary review comes with some long‑term uncertainty our aim is always to make decisions that limit the need for repeated changes down the road.

Question #12: After reviewing the septic report and the review findings, I find it concerning that the septic can only handle 252 population and neither option 1 or option 2 are getting capacity down to that level to support the septic system. This means that moving students to either Norwich or Woodstock is doing nothing to fix the septic capacity issues...I don't see these students being redirected to Woodstock schools in either suggestion? From the septic review, option 2 does not seem reasonable to connect to municipal sewer given the rural nature of the school...Neither septic option has looked at increasing holding tank capacity and getting is pumped regularly to keep septic at a reasonable level for current system. Can you get more than one review of our septic options? I would prefer a non-city (London) company to review alternative options... 

Response #12: At this time, we only have the single septic system review available, and in both options our goal remains to alleviate as much enrollment pressure as possible at East Oxford Central.

Question #11: In follow-up of my question regarding the lack of trustees: given that the community is now geographically divided into two distinct groups based on the options you have presented, how can a random draw for committee members ensure fair representation if the selection ends up skewed toward one side? I would like to suggest alternative selection methods, like weighted draws, to ensure both areas are represented fairly.

Response #11: The purpose of the committee is to ensure that all voices and opinions from the community are heard. To achieve this, we must continue to adhere to the Attendance Area Review (AAR) procedure, which outlines how committee members are selected and how representation is managed throughout the process.

Question #10: There are new builds going up behind Bower Hill in Woodstock. Where will those students be attending? It would make more sense for them to attend Central.

Response #10: Thank you for your correspondence. The Homewood subdivision is currently designated to Eastdale Public School. As student enrolment from this new development materializes, there may be a future need to consider requesting an addition within the community.

Question #9: Central Public School was recently included in the Attendance Area Review for North Woodstock, where projections indicated that enrollment would decrease initially and then increase following the opening and placement of students to Turtle Island. The projections done in that area review indicated 91% by 2031 and now you project 67% by 2032. Could you explain what factors have changed to result in these new projections only a short time later?

Response #9: Our projections are based on the best data available at the time they are produced. Since the earlier Attendance Area Review, several factors have changed that have contributed to a lower overall enrollment outlook for the board.

These include a slowdown in residential development activity, adjustments to development timelines, and shifts in immigration policy. These changes have resulted in fewer new students entering the system, which is reflected in the updated projections.

Question #8: What percentage of student withdrawal from TVDSB is assumed in your boundary change modeling, and how does your plan change if families instead choose private, Catholic, or homeschooling options?

Response #8: If projections shift from our initial assumptions, we will analyze the reasons for the change and determine the best path forward.

Question #7: What methodology is used to balance birth data, anticipated development, and board share when generating projections? Specifically, does the model apply a standard board share across all schools, or does it incorporate neighbourhood-level variations, particularly in areas like East Oxford where private school participation is much higher?

Response #7: We receive birth registry data each year, organized by the number of births within each school boundary. Using this information, we review the number of births and, based on historical trends, project the number of Junior Kindergarten students expected to register at each school. This projection incorporates a ratio that accounts for students who may enroll in other school boards.

For new residential developments, we review the number and types of units that will be constructed. Using student data from comparable completed developments, we establish a student yield. This yield is then applied to future developments to project the number of students we can expect to receive.

Question #6: How many consecutive years of stable or declining actual enrollment data would be required before reconsidering projections that anticipate continued growth?

Response #6: There is no predetermined number of consecutive years of stable or declining enrolment that automatically prompts a revision to our long term projections. If enrolment begins to decline at any of our schools, we review the underlying causes and adjust our assumptions and projections as needed.

Question #5: In the absence of a local trustee who possesses both a commitment to our students' success and a deep understanding of our community, what specific measures are being taken to ensure our stakeholders remain an integral part of the decision-making process?

Response #5: As part of this review, measures are in place to ensure that community members remain actively involved in the decision making process. Families are encouraged to participate through the Attendance Area Review process and through the Attendance Area Review Committee (AARC).

We are seeking volunteers from each school to serve on the AARC. These representatives help gather school level feedback and provide input directly into the review process, ensuring that the perspectives of families and stakeholders are reflected in the analysis and recommendations. More information about the process and participation opportunities can be found on the Area Review website: East Oxford Attendance Area Review.

Question #4: Is there not enough children just in Burgesville and surrounding areas alone that they could just go to Emily Stowe instead of potentially moving an entire community from a country school to a city school. That transition alone would not be easy for anyone.

As well I hope that people’s home addresses are actually being looked at. There are a NUMBER of students using grandparents addresses, that should be attending a different school.

There is no new builds happening so why the sudden jump in enrollment? People are using others addresses and abusing the system.

Response #4: Thank you for your correspondence. We are providing the community with two options to ensure they have a voice in determining which approach will be potentially implemented.

The growth within the East Oxford Central attendance area is largely driven by demographic shifts, as families have moved into the area and occupied existing dwellings.

Question #3: I am concerned about what is happening with the potential rezoning of East Oxford Central Public school. We are a rural/farming family. My husband, his siblings, and our own children have all attended Sweaburg Public School and East Oxford. As grandchildren are in our near future, I am concerned about the possibility of them one day having to attend a "city" school for their elementary years. I am also wondering how the new subdivision (Homewood) on Bower Hill Rd/Karn Rd. will impact schools and boundaries in this area. Where are these children attending school? Will we need a new school built to accommodate the grown at this end of the county?

Response #3: Thank you for your correspondence. The Homewood subdivision is currently designated to Eastdale Public School. As student enrolment from this new development materializes, there may be a future need to consider requesting an addition within the community.

Question #2: We were provided information on the number of students potentially being sent to Central School (approximately 101 kids). Is there data on how many kids are on either side of the 401? For example, how many kids live in Sweaburg vs those on the other side of the 401?

Response #2: Thank you for your correspondence. The information requested is outlined below: 

• 5 students reside north of Highway 401
• 96 students reside south of Highway 401
• Of the 96 students living south of the 401, 73 reside in Sweaburg

Question #1: I feel that this is an absolutely unfair suggestion for changes - my children are not directly impacted by either proposal...However, I have...children at East Oxford who have built relationships with children in these areas…particularly when speaking about taking the entire Sweaburg catchment area and sending them to Woodstock. My children’s best friends all come from that area; we play sports outside of school in Sweaburg and it is a cornerstone of our school’s community. Sending that population into a downtown Woodstock school when they have purchased homes in an extremely expensive community in large part for the small rural school experience is absolutely offensive. Not to mention, will be terrible for the population of East Oxford as well. That is not a small number of families that would be impacted…every single family at the school will feel the result of moving the community of Sweaburg away from our school. Please reconsider this option - it’s absolutely not a reasonable choice.

Response #1: Thank you for your correspondence and addressing your concerns to the initial options presented. We will be seeking school community feedback in order to strengthen the options under consideration. We encourage members of each school community to participate in this process and provide input into the school community report that each school will be submitting before the final report.