DNA Cluster Endangers Nature Areas, Former Board Member Says
A
past member of both Trent University's board of governors and Senate warns that Trent's distinctive nature areas are threatened by the apparent frenzy to develop commercial opportunities on campus lands. "In June, 2005 Trent's Board was assured that the proposed sports field would not be built in the Wildlife Sanctuary at the City's requested location, but Trent's administration seems to have subsequently flip-flopped on that assurance. With so many mosquitoes about, perhaps someone had an itchy back," writes Derrick McIntosh. Commenting on the "unbridled haste" with which Trent has entered into agreements with the City to prop up the DNA Cluster business park (for which no business plan exists), McIntosh notes the administration and Senate are playing fast and loose with policy and their respective responsibilities, to the potentially irrevocable detriment of Trent and the greater community. There is still time "for the University's governing bodies to rectify this short-sighted and reckless folly," he says.
Trent's bicameral governance structure, as defined in the Trent Act, allocates authority to the Board of Governors and to the Senate respectively. In Kulchyski v. Trent University it was noted that not all issues fall neatly into the exclusive authority of one body. Judge Sharpe (dissenting) noted;
These provisions plainly envisage a power-sharing relationship between Senate and the Board. Decisions falling within these provisions give rise to issues of both financial management and educational policy and hence require the concurrence of both bodies. As the President of the University, Bonnie Patterson, conceded on cross-examination, where a matter has both educational policy and financial implications, the approval of both Senate and the Board is necessary.
The Nature Areas Stewardship Plan, the DNA cluster and its spin-off developments such as the building a soccer sports complex in a designated Nature Area, are but examples where it seems authority of Senate and the board intersect, interface and/or overlap. But bicameral governance, absent defined mechanisms to resolve stalemate, relies upon collegiality and transparency between the parties, as was noted in the Arthurs-Lorimer Report of 1997. Since that time collegiality and transparency appear to have remained in short supply at Trent, and recommendations in Arthurs-Lorimer have not been implemented.
Many are concerned that the lack of transparency and accountability surrounding Trent's recent developments and current development plans plans are indicative of a rush job lacking both reasoning and process. There is widespread concern, in and beyond the Trent and Peterborough communities, that the DNA Cluster project is neither viable nor sustainable. There is growing community concern that Trent and Peterborough may be saddled with the costs if sound reasoning continues to play second fiddle to glossy media promotions. There is concern government funding bodies have become too entrenched in the project and will be susceptible to demand and lobby for increased public funding rather than to concede having invested inappropriately.
We at OurTrent are not alone in being alarmed that the response of the Trent administration is to turn a blind eye to these and other concerns which are deserving of proper consideration. Rather than respond openly and with transparent reasoning the media moguls at Trent turn up the dial a notch. It was an insult to the intelligence and integrity of our communities that Trent president Bonnie Patterson claimed there to be a "wide base of community support" for the DNA cluster when in fact that is not the case (Nov 15 press release).
McIntosh concludes telling us there is still time "for the University's governing bodies to rectify this short-sighted and reckless folly."
If McIntosh is right, and we hope he is, will Trent's board and Senate be able to rise to the challenge?
Over the years Derrick McIntosh has contributed significantly, and selflessly, to both the Trent and Peterborough communities. In addition to serving terms on the Trent University Senate and board of governors McIntosh is a past president of the Trent Central Student Association (TCSA). He was involved in the creation of the Peter Robinson Community and Student Association (PRCSA) which reclaimed and preserved Saldeir House for community use. McIntosh was the first Steward of the PRCSA, which operates independent of Trent University.
| Derrick McIntosh | |
| Trent University Board of Governors | 1998 - 2000, member |
| Trent University Senate | 1998-99, non-voting member, 1999-2000, voting member, 2000-01 & 2004-05, non-voting member |
| Trent Central Student Association (TCSA) | 2000-01, president |
| Peter Robinson Community and Student Association (PRCSA) | 2003-05, steward |
| The Cart and the Horse: Why the DNA Cluster is Endangering Trent's Nature Areas By Derrick McIntosh - November 28, 2005 Trent University's recent discussions with the City of Peterborough to build a sports field in the University's Wildlife Sanctuary have run afoul. In a letter to the City, Trent professors now independently advise that the land is unsuitable for many reasons, including being bordered by mosquito-laden swamps that raise a heightened risk of West Nile Virus transmission. Additionally, the construction of the facility in one of Trent's designated nature areas (land protected from development by the University's Board of Governors and Senate) risks deleterious environmental impacts, including threatening the water table with contamination from septic services. This is a bad deal for sports enthusiasts and wildlife alike. The unbridled haste with which the University nevertheless charged into this venture stands in stark contrast to the long years that the Stewardship Plan for the Nature Areas has languished without review or approval. Why is the Trent administration so eager to play amateur sports but so disinterested in conservancy and good stewardship? The construction of the sports field is just one in a list of promises that the City finagled from the University in exchange for at least $2 million of public money to fund the new DNA Cluster business park, a pet project of Trent administrators still sorely absent the private sector investment that it has long tried to attract. In exchange, the City has also staked out hydro-electric developments on University lands which appear poised to imperil still other nature areas. In June, 2005 Trent's Board was assured that the proposed sports field would not be built in the Wildlife Sanctuary at the City's requested location, but Trent's administration seems to have subsequently flip-flopped on that assurance. With so many mosquitoes about, perhaps someone had an itchy back. Trent now stands in the baffling position of damaging its Wildlife Sanctuary, important to existing educational policy, in order to construct a business park with only spurious links to the University's educational policy as determined by Senate. Senate has yet to make the DNA Cluster an academic component of the University and yet to adopt or implement a plan for stewardship of the nature areas. In this situation, the sports field's construction is rash. The recent claims that the land in question is expendable remain unfounded and prejudicial so long as the Senate and Board have not yet both exercised their responsibilities in these matters. Last spring, the Senate resolved to discuss the Stewardship Plan in the fall of this year. In light of the administration's recent actions, the Senate must urgently and with diligence uphold its resolution and act to protect the nature areas. No doubt the first driver who put a cart before a horse really thought that she had an expeditious plan. The driver only proved a fool when she did not correct herself or heed the correction of others. It is time – and there is still time – for the University's governing bodies to rectify this short-sighted and reckless folly. |
