Trustees on the New Westminster school board approved a two-week spring break at their meeting Tuesday night.
While not all trustees were supportive of the recommendation made by the district calendar committee, the motion to approve the new school calendar passed in a four-to-two vote.
Trustee Lisa Graham voted in favour of the motion but only because it will financially benefit the district during a time where every penny counts.
"I absolutely resent having to vote for it but it was for fiscal reasons," she said. "Our financial situation is so dire, I didn't feel that I had a choice. We have to look everywhere (for revenue)."
Acting secretary-treasurer, Al Balanuik, has identified a possible operating budget shortfall of $1 million as of June 2013. While it's still in a draft format, the bud-get indicates various district shortfalls. Balanuik said he is still optimistic that they'll be able to pull together the required funds by June.
But if the district doesn't find these funds, the budget deficit will have a lasting effect on the district's finances.
And this is where two-week spring break comes in.
According to superintendent John Woudzia, closing down schools for a second week at spring break will save the district between $35,000 and $40,000.
The calendar committee drafted a survey, which was sent out to parents, staff, students and community members across New Westminster to collect some input on the possible changes to the school calendar.
The survey, which received 1,300 responses, found that most people favoured a two-week spring break. While the margins varied from elementary to high school, most parents were in support of the change.
Woudzia noted some of the responses highlighted a concern about available childcare and activity programs during the additional week. Twenty per cent of parents indicating their interest in child-care or programming were also concerned "that accessing such services would create financial hardship for them."
Graham said this was one of the reasons she had a hard time supporting the decision.
"I actually don't agree with the two-week calendar, I think it creates tremendous hardship for families," she said. "I'm hopeful that through the year we will actually get input from the public and from parents."
Graham was appalled by the lack of consultation with the District Parent Advisory Council and other school parent councils in the district - but she understands it's largely due to a time crunch.
The committee had only eight weeks to make a recommendation to council. The board is required to submit its final decision to the Ministry of Education by March 31.
Graham said she hopes the board will re-evaluate the decision next year with more input from key stakeholders.
