Co-located colleges in limbo
JENNIFER EDER ‘‘unjustified’’, in a cabinet committee report released to Marlborough Boys’ College under the Official Information Act.
‘‘[It] does not provide sufficient options, analysis or justification for the proposed $63.2m investment,’’ the report said.
But the ministry said 392 people submitted, as far back as 2013, in favour of co-locating Marlborough Boys’ and Marlborough Girls’ colleges, while 58 voted to retain the status quo, and 163 wanted a purpose-built coeducational college.
The colleges’ deputy principals took on new roles in 2016 as fulltime planning managers, employed to research ideas, consult the community and submit briefs to architects.
When asked on Friday where the co-location process was at, Hipkins said he would have to take advice from ministry staff.
But after media inquiries on Monday, the ministry notified the colleges of the review, who notified parents by email.
School surprise
Marlborough Boys’ College principal Wayne Hegarty said ministry officials called him on Friday to schedule a visit at the start of Term 2 for an update on the co-location process.
‘‘We knew, broad brush, that there would be a review, but not what that meant exactly. The first we knew the scale of it was Monday,’’ Hegarty said.
‘‘At least we know where we are now, rather than operating on conjecture.’’
Planning managers Michael Heath and Jo Chamberlain’s work over the past three years was not ‘‘all for nothing’’, Hegarty said.
‘‘As an institution we are significantly better off after the process that’s been undertaken. Staff got the chance to look at new curriculums, do professional development, and it’s allowed us to look at where we are and what we might like to do.’’
Marlborough Girls’ College board chairman Bernie Rowe said he was surprised by the news, as he was expecting the location to be announced shortly.
‘‘We thought things were just ticking along. We don’t know where we stand now. But we do know [the ministry is] just reporting back to Mr Hipkins. I think [co-location] will have to go ahead,’’ Rowe said.
‘‘The ministry knows we want co-location. So if they’re going to choose something else, it would be disappointing. We’ve done a lot of work on the co-location plans that are in front of them now. To go back to the community now would be taking a step backwards.’’
However, he understood the reasoning behind the review, Rowe said.
‘‘Obviously things weren’t working out with the Alabama Rd site. They’ve tried a few different pieces of land. And cost is obviously important too.
‘‘I guess we’ll have to wait and see what comes out of the review. It may be that it still goes ahead.’’
Girls’ College principal Maryjeanne Lynch said she felt the ministry was doing the right thing, considering how many years had passed since the first business case was put together.
Lynch was deputy principal at Avonside Girls’ High School in Christchurch when its co-location with Shirley Boys’ High School at QEII park was announced in 2015. The shared campus was expected to open for Term 2 next year.
The ministry often reviewed aspects of that process during Lynch’s time there, so she was not surprised it was reviewing Marlborough’s co-location, she said.
‘‘We had a change of cladding choice on the outside of the buildings [planned for the Avonside/ Shirley co-location] due to that incident with the Grenfell Tower fire [in London last year] ... So the ministry is constantly reviewing these things.
‘‘I am used to the ministry’s approach. They are thorough and they do look at decisions again. So it’s good to see they are providing some good information to the new minister.’’
Hipkins said on Tuesday he understood there was significant interest from the Marlborough community.
‘‘It’s been three years since the original proposal. Given that there have been difficulties in finding a suitable site for the colocated colleges, and the estimated cost of the project has increased considerably, it’s important to make sure that the co-location option is still the preferred option.’’
Marlborough Boys’ College board chairman Sturrock Saunders said he was ‘‘obviously very disappointed’’.
‘‘But I also understand why. It was a decision made by a previous government and this government wants to do its due diligence ... and it’s the ministry’s acquisition of land, you’ve got to have a willing seller.
‘‘The project for us remains live. We’re resolute about colocation on a greenfield site. It’s had really positive support from the community. And the current buildings, in the states they’re in, they’re not fit for purpose.’’
What now?
Shannon said the ministry would be actively consulting with the colleges throughout the process, and keeping the community updated. ‘‘The local community will be given opportunities to express their views on the updated options once they have been presented to the schools,’’ Shannon said.
‘‘We expect to be in a position