To Whom it may Concern,

My name is Bronwen Trask. I currently reside in Digby County, Nova Scotia. It has recently been brought to my attention that Weymouth Consolidated School, located in Digby County, has been sharing premises with an Aleutian Disease blood testing laboratory. After much research, my findings are that this is not only inappropriate but it is also unnecessary. This is my personal opinion, however, I do not stand alone. Many families in the immediate area are highly concerned over this matter. They are scared to stand up for this situation as the mink industry is big business here, and when people speak up, they find themselves bullied.

It is unnecessary for school aged children to be forced to attend a school with additional risk. Some of these parents cannot afford alternative schooling even though they feel uncomfortable with sending their children there. There is no alternative provided for these families. Do any other schools in our province have disease blood testing labs on site? It is not necessary for the children and therefore should be moved. There is still much risk associated with this lab. There have been a lot of changes and new procedures put in place, however, it operated for a long time with very loose policies. These families should not have to worry about their children contracting diseases or being approached by strangers. Rancher vehicles entering the premises could potentially be harboring infected animals and diseases.

There have been 2 reported cases of humans affected by Aleutians Disease. Please visit the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. http://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/15/12/09-0514_article.htm

As a status Mi’kmaq, many of my ancestors were killed by infectious diseases, and I do not feel comfortable risking my children’s lives. Our unique Amerindian Haplo Group C1c blood type B makes us more susceptible to the diseases that have been brought here to our country. No matter the race, no child should have an increased risk at school. I have some questions below I would like to have answered. This issue has been swept under the rug for over a decade. It is time for a change!

Should anyone require further documentation, please let me know.

Thanks for any and all assistance with this matter,

Bronwen Trask

Some diseases carried by Mink are airborne. Where is the exhaust system vented to? Is there an air exchange system that is shared between the lab and the school? Are the same heating ducts used?

June 17th 2003
- Weymouth Consolidated School and the Tri-County Regional School Board have agreed to let a space to 340 Rancher's Co-Operative Limited in the Weymouth Consolidated school at the rate of $500.00 per month
- At the time, "The Premises" were the chemistry lab, and an adjoining classroom
- Conditions of the original agreement;

- (i) 340 Rancher’s Cooperative Limited, its agents and employees will have free and unfettered access to the premises

- (iv) 340 Rancher’s Cooperative Limited covenants that no “hazardous materials” will be brought into the premises or onto the lands of the Weymouth Consolidated School

This document was signed by a Mr. Larry Kelly, on June 24^th 2003 on behalf of WCS and TCRSB. There is other questionable material included in this document but I will focus on the main two.

Who approved Condition (i)? This is very questionable as it really put all the children at the school in severe jeopardy. Why would TCRSB agree to such ludicrous conditions?

Who approved Condition (iv)? Is infected/potentially infected blood not hazardous?

September 12^th 2003

- A memo is created by Weymouth AD Lab and sent to "All Ranchers" that goes into effect until it was later changed on January 29th 2004. This memo included a map.

- It indicates samples were allowed to be booked and dropped off for testing between 8:30 am and 11:00 pm and between 2:30 pm and 4:30 pm.

- Copy of the attached map indicates they would have access to front and rear entrance, carrying blood through the corridors of the school. The map is outrageous considering how close they were to play areas and other high traffic areas that were used by small children.

Who authorized "ranch vehicles" accessing public areas that children would be playing in? Were these vehicles properly sanitized prior to driving in areas that children would be subject to?

What security measures were in place to ensure these “rancher” individuals dropping off samples were allowed on school premises? Were there any background checks completed?

January 20^th 2004

- Timothy Cook, a resident of the area, writes a letter to Mr. Kelly regarding his personal concerns with the lab.

January 22^nd 2004

- Mr. Kelly responds to Mr. Cook. He indicates that the Occupational Health and Safety board has been to the school and has found nothing to be concerned about. He also indicates that the School Board does not have a problem with the lab being at the school. He also can be quoted as writing “Please be assured that your children are in no way at risk because the lab is located at the school.”. He later added “As far as we are concerned the Lab is mutually beneficial to both school and community.”

At the time in question, was the lab space cleared by OH&S?

At the time in question, what department indicated, or what type of assessment was done for Mr. Kelly to assure the level of “no risk”?

In what way was the lab beneficial to the school?

March 15^th 2004

- Minister of Health, Jamie Muir, addresses Mr. Tim Cook’s concerns over the lab. At that time, he admitted the arrangement had just recently been brought to his attention.

- As far as I can see, when these documents are cross-referenced with The Education Act, many issues arise.

- Commercial activity

64A

A school board shall not engage in or carry out any commercial activ-

ity, including lending, without the approval of the Minister.

2002, c. 5, s. 10; 2008, c. 53,

s. 2.

Unauthorized activity

64B

For greater certainty, a school board

shall not engage in or carry out

any activity that is outside the authority, powers, duties and responsibilities of the

school board pursuant to this Act and the regulations.

2002, c. 5, s. 10

Why was this issue never investigated? If it were, why were the results not made public? It is clearly a violation of the Act.

April 1^st 2004

- Heather Harris, an employee of Weymouth AD Lab, addressed Brian Cullen the Chief Administrative Officer at the Municipality of Digby in a letter.

- She can be quoted as writing;

- “The lab is located in a semi-attached section at the rear of the school which is not occupied by students and only connected to the main building by a corridor. This facility was chosen because there was already an existing lab in place and very few modifications were necessary. The Grade 4 – 6 students pass by the lab when entering and exiting the building.”

- “Clients bringing samples to us enter and leave the lab reception area via the back door. No vehicles are to be driven behind the school unless it is after 3 p.m. or on days where there are no children present.”

- “Pauline Hickey, OHS for Tri-County School Board has been here and is satisfied with the procedures in place.”

Why was there a time that the students would be allowed near the blood disease testing lab?

Vehicle tires with potential disease/vehicles with potentially harbored animals were allowed to access areas that school children also had access to. Regardless of the time frame, some diseases, carried by mink such as Aleutians Disease can lay dormant for up to two years. Who authorized this path of travel?

Can we, the people, please be provided with the assessment taken by Ms. Hickey at that time?

April 2^nd 2004

- Mr. Tim Cook wrote another letter, addressed to Mr. Kelly regarding the potential spread of diseases to the children, other than Aleutians Disease.

April 15^th 2004

- Mike Sweeney, Senior Executive Director of Public Schools, addressed Mr. Tim Cook on behalf of Minister Muir, in response to Mr. Cook’s letter dated March 24^th 2004.

- Mr. Sweeney can be quoted as writing “In response to your first two questions, the Department of Education had no involvement in the arrangements to lease space in the Weymouth Consolidated School to 340 Ranchers Cooperative Ltd.”

(ad) provide and pay for adequate equipment and furnish-

ings for public schools and the maintenance and operation of equip-

ment, furnishings and school buildings;

(ae) manage, maintain, repair a

nd keep safe all real and per-

sonal property owned, leased or used by the board;

(af) insure, in amounts agreed

upon by the Minister, all

buildings and personal property owned by the school board;

(ag) pay its own administration costs including, without

limiting the generality of the foregoing, the provision of office space,

supplies and equipment, payments

to auditors and board members,

and the enforcemen

t of this Act;

(ah) provide the sums required to pay the cost of arbitration

boards appointed pursuant to the provisions of the

Teachers' Collec-

tive Bargaining Act

and to implement the awards of such boards;

(ai) designate persons to execu

te agreements on behalf of

the school board;

(aj) establish a public tendering and procurement policy,

consistent with the Atlantic Provinces Procurement Agreement or

similar or successor agreement;

(ak) with the approval of the

Minister, enter into agree-

ments with municipalities for the purpose of carrying out this Act and

the regulations;

(al) co-operate with other school boards and Government

departments and agencies to ensure

the effective and efficient carry-

ing out of this Act and the regulations;

(ala) establish a school board conf

lict of interest policy for

school board staff consistent with

the Provincial conflict of interest

policy for school board staff established by the Minister in the regula-

tions;

(alb) adopt a code of ethics

in accordance with the regula-

tions;

(am) submit to the Minister an annual report containing such

information as is required by the Minister; and

(an) perform such other duties requested by or delegated to

it by the Minister or required to carry out its responsibilities under

this Act

Commercial activity

64A

A school board shall not engage in or carry out any commercial activ-

ity, including lending, without the approval of the Minister.

2002, c. 5, s. 10; 2008, c. 53,

s. 2.

Unauthorized activity

64B

For greater certainty, a school board

shall not engage in or carry out

any activity that is outside the authority, powers, duties and responsibilities of the

school board pursuant to this Act and the regulations.

2002, c. 5, s. 10

.

Why were these issues never investigated? If they were, why were the results not made public? It is clearly a violation of the Act.

April 20^th 2004

- Correspondence between Mr. Cullen and Mr. Finley

- Mr. Finley can be quoted as writing “I am not aware of any zoonotic diseases (those transmissible from animals to humans) which have been reported as originating from mink bloods. In conclusion, I feel that mink bloods, as currently handled, should be of minimal concern as a potential source for zoonotic diseases.

There are multiple sources that indicate that although it is rare, transmission of Aleutian Disease is possible between Mink to Human, what authority does Mr. Finley have to definitively discuss his personal opinion on the matter?

What government departments agree that mink bloods should be of minimal concern?

Is there a situation in which a minimal concern is adequate?

Do the school members families not care of any type of risk?

Should our children not be offered the same safe educational facilities as all other children in Nova Scotia?

July 27^th 2004

- Mr. Earl Cook requests a letter from Dr. Michael Gray, from the Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology of Dalhousie University, stating the presence of the lab poses no threat to the children now or ever.

August 12^th 2004

- Mr. Earl Cook receives a reply from Dr. Michael Gray. See some quotes below;

- “Specifically, you are “seeking a signed letter stating the presence of this lab being located and operating in our elementary school amidst our young children poses no threat to them or anyone now or ever”. As a professional scientist with over 35 years of experience working in ad directing a research laboratory, I can offer you no such assurance. Based on the information you conveyed in our telephone conversation on July 22, 2004, it would appear that this laboratory is testing specifically for Aleutian Mink Disease Virus (ADV), a parvovirus that infects mink, ferrets, raccoons, skunks, and possibly other members of the Mustilidae. It may well be that this virus is not known to infect human cells and/or cause disease in humans. However, in light of unanticipated animal-to-human transmission of other viral diseases (the recent epidemic of avian influenza being one example), the fact that mink naturally harbor other disease-causing viruses, and the possibility that this species (like all other animals) may carry other, potentially disease-causing agents that are not yet recognized, I do not believe that anyone could make the sort of absolute statement that you are requesting. As a researcher, I am subject to the Laboratory Biosafety Guidelines issued by Health Canada. I quote from the guidelines, Section 4.4, Risk Levels Associated with the Use of Laboratory Animals: “The use of experimental animals and insects poses specials problems. Animals can harbor infectious organisms which are acquired naturally. These infections can give rise to a chronic carrier state, or the agent might persist in a latent non-infective form which can be reactivated periodically or as a result of certain stimuli. If the possibility that such an agent may be excreted by an animal during the course of an experiment cannot be excluded, all those animals should be kept at a containment level appropriate to the risk.” The guidelines go on to say: “In all situations, it is the responsibility of the scientist and the host institution in consultation with the Government and the Animal Care authorities, to determine the risk levels inherent in the proposed activity.””

- “Parvoviruses such as ADV are currently classified in Risk Group 2, defined as “moderate individual risk, low community risk”: A pathogen that can cause human or animal disease but, under normal circumstances, is unlikely to be a serious hazard to laboratory workers, the community, livestock, or the environment. Laboratory exposures rarely cause infection leading to serious disease; effective treatment and preventive measures are available and the risk of spread is limited.”

- “In summary, working with animal blood is not a risk-free activity. “

- “The only way to guarantee a complete absence of risk would be to have the blood testing facility at another location, physically remote from the school itself.”

Why are children subjected to any type of risk?

Are there any other schools in the province that have to share premises with a blood disease testing lab?

Even with a low risk, there is still a risk. Is this appropriate?

May 16^th 2005

- Correspondence between Mr. Earl Cook and Larry Kelly.

- As quoted by Mr. E. Cook, “The only way to guarantee a complete absence of risk would be to have the blood testing facility located at another location, physically remote from the School itself. So to enable us to be assured that our children are at no risk, we need a letter from an equally qualified person being made aware of this blood being transported across our children’s playground and into our school, being the same playground, entrance and hallway which our young children use as well. We need this letter signed by this person stating that this blood lab poses no risk at all to our children now or ever. In closing, we do not feel this to be an unreasonable request.”

What benefits arise from the on-site diseased blood lab facility?

Would there ever be a chance that this lab would be risk free?

May 27^th 2005

- Bill Estabrooks, MLA, questions Minister Muir via e-mail.

- He can be quoted as writing “As a former school principal, I have to question this use of a public school. I also understand that local residents have met with you to voice their concerns about the facility operating in their school. I recognize that mink farming is a very important industry in Nova Scotia, and needs to be encouraged, but the location of this lab is cause for concern. I am wondering how a commercial lab could establish itself in a public school in the first place, and what other commercial enterprises may now be operating that we are unaware of. I look forward to your reply and to viewing the Department’s commercial use of schools policy.”

- A news release is issued by Mr. Estabrooks regarding his concerns about the lab.

If to even one person this is a cause for concern, why is this issue pushed aside?

If one person, Mr. Estabrooks, can be quoted to asking “I am wondering how a commercial lab could establish itself in a public school in the first place, and what other commercial enterprises may now be operating that we are unaware of. I look forward to your reply, and to viewing the Department’s commercial use of schools policy.” how can we feel safe that our education act and other school board policies are being taken seriously?

June 2005

- Barry Gibb of Liverpool has a letter to the newspaper published including his concerns of the lab.

June 9^th 2005

- Mr. Muir addresses Mr. Estabrooks in a written letter.

- He can be quoted as indicating; “As you are no doubt aware, the Education Act was amended in 2002 to place parameters around school board involvement in commercial activity. Section 64A of the Act states that “A school board shall not engage in or carry out any commercial activity, including lending, without the approval of the Governor in Council”.

- “As a result of this provision, boards must now request Governor in Council approval for any commercial activity through the Minister of Education.

How was this approved without permission of Governor in Council?

June 22^nd 2005

- A letter from Mr. Muir is sent to Mr. E. Cook.

- Mr. Muir has requested that Leroy Legere, Regional Education Officer ask the office of public health to “reaffirm that no health danger is posed to children attending the school.”.

- According to this document, leasing the TCRSB property is a decision within the discretion of the school board.

How come after this amount of time, there is an acceptable health danger exposed to children?

Who came to the decision that leasing of the TCRSB property was appropriate?

June 24^th 2005

- Mr. E. Cook corresponds with Mr. Muir regarding his concerns with the blood testing lab at the Weymouth Consolidated School.

- Mr. Cook begins the mail indicating “If we are wrong on our approach to the removal of the lab, please advise us so that we may understand and we will rectify any true mistakes that we have made.”

If the people of the community questioned the lease extension of the dangerous blood lab, and requested it not be renewed, why push to renew it? How did this benefit the school children?

June 2^nd 2005

- A newspaper article published by Brian Medel makes parents and citizens question current issues;

- “On their way to the playground each day, some students at Weymouth Consolidated School walk down a corridor past closed doors with signs reading Authorized Laboratory Personnel Only and Weymouth A.D. Laboratory Reception.”

- “Many parents want to know who said a commercial lab could be established in the school.”

- “They use a back entrance and don’t usually run into children, said the lab’s chief technician a few months after the facility opened.”

- “The lab was inspected on May 11 of last year by the Nova Scotia Department of Environment and Labour. Spokesman Bill Turpin said the lab passed the inspection. He also noted that children do share the corridor with people dropping off blood specimens.”

- “Many Weymouth parents and residents still don’t want the lab in their school. On Wednesday an education department is holding talks with the Tri-County board before a decision is made this month on whether the lab will remain. The tri-County board is seeking a lease extension, said Sue McKeage. “We’re following the regulations,” she said. The regulations she spoke of include a section that says a school board shall not engage in or carry out any commercial activity including lending without the approval of the governor in council, which is the provincial cabinet. Weymouth resident Earl Cook said the education minister confirmed to him in a letter that he was not aware of the lab’s existence at first. “We have a letter from Jamie Muir in April of 2004 telling us that it was just recently brought to his attention.” Said Mr. Cook. The lab began testing blood in September of 2003, which was seven months before that letter was written.”

- “New Democrat education critic Bill Estabrooks said he’s shocked that a blood testing lab would be allowed to set up in a school.”

- “Mr. Kelly declined to comment on the lab when he was asked on Tuesday. “I don’t wish to get involved right now,” he said but indicated he would talk about it later in the year. “Give me a few weeks until I get some other things arranged.” Said Mr. Kelly.

Why, and for how long were children exposed to strange individuals who did not have security clearance to be around children?

Why, and for how long were children sharing a corridor with these people?

Why has there been no investigation into how the lab was put in school property without the Minister of Educations approval?

July 1^st 2005

- Brian Medel publishes an article entitled “Commercial school usage in question”

Questions and concerns arise from this, why has there not been a press release in response to the issues?

The families of the children attending this school have demanded information and changes. Why has nothing been done to remove all risk?

August 4^th 2005

- Correspondence to Mr. Muir from Mr. Earl Cook. Some quotes below;

- “We have been advised by Mr. Harold Theriault of a telephone conversation from yourself stating that you may let the lab stay in our School until June of 2006 to give the Mink Ranchers time to find a new and suitable location for testing their minks blood. Please be advised that the Mink Ranchers have a new location available in the former Havelock School which is closed and no children are attending. “

Why did the move not happen?

August 17^th 2005

-Jamie Muir approved that the lease be extended for a one year period ending June 30, 2006, with the expectation that the WAD Lab would relocate to another venue at the expiration of the lease. The one year extension would provide the lead time necessary for the association to seek such an alternate location.

December 5^th 2005

- Harold Theriault, MLA Digby/Annapolis, questioned Jamie Muir via a letter. Some quotes below;

-“ In a phone concersation with you in early August 2005, you advised me that this lab would be removed from this school by June of 2006. You had advised that this would give the Weymouth lab time to find another suitable location in the area. On August 17^th 2005 I received a copy of a letter addressed to Fay Haley, Chair or Tri-County School board stating the same, the lab would be extended until June 30^th, 2006. I have recently discovered that this may not be true. I have heard that this lab may be in this school for a longer period of time, perhaps until 2008. If there has been a change to the date of the removal of this lab, that you had agreed upon, an explanation from your office would be greatly appreciated.”

February 15^th 2006

- Harold Theriault, MLA Digby/Annapolis, wrote Mr. Muir. Some quotes below;

- “A letter was sent to your office dated December 05, 2005 regarding a change of dates for the extension of the lab lease. (see attached letter) To date, this office has not received any information about this new date or change or if in fact there is a change in date.”

February 17^th 2006

- Jamie Muir wrote Mr. Cook and indicated “the Tri-County school board has extended the lease to allow the WAD lab to continue to function in its current location. Also, despite the assurances that there is no health or safety risk to students and staff, the Association has agreed that blood samples would not be delivered or picked up during regular school hours.”

February 20^th 2006

- Mr. Muir addressed Mr. Theriault and indicated “As a follow-up to the request, the Deputy Ministers of Education and Agriculture and Fisheries made an on-site visit to the facility. As a result, the pick-up and delivery times of the mink blood samples have been altered to avoid regular school hours.”

There is obviously some type of risk if things were altered. How was this allowed to go on for so long?

January 17^th 2008

- A letter is sent to Mr. Wayne Gaudet, MLA Clare, from Karen Casey, Minister of Education. Some quotes below;

- “The Tri-County Regional School Board has informed us that they have transferred ownership of the property that contains the lab to the municipality. The Mink Ranchers’ Association will now deal directly with the municipality on the details of their occupancy. As of this date, the required work on a new roadway for access to the laboratory has not begun, nor has the physical divider between the school and the laboratory section has been erected.”