The East Haven School District Board of Education discussed a proposed five‑year extension of its contract with B&B Transportation that would lock in annual price increases of 8.95 percent. Board members and central office staff laid out the district’s current annual transportation spend — about $3.1 million in fiscal 2024–25 — and described contract provisions the district’s negotiators said drove the pricing: a requirement that the average fleet age remain no more than 12 years, a plan for several new buses to be purchased during the contract period, rising labor and insurance costs, and the absence of a fuel surcharge because the contractor provides fuel under the proposal.

Staff reported the district runs 31 buses on daily routes and that the current per‑bus, per‑run rate for 2025–26 was $437.39. Staff offered comparisons to neighboring districts that have higher normalized per‑run rates once run length and fuel arrangements are considered. Central office said the higher price is driven in part by recent bus purchase prices (one invoice cited in the discussion: about $81,900 in 2021 versus $131,000 a bus reported for a recent purchase) and projected capital and regulatory costs for future years, including the potential cost to transition to electric buses if required by state or industry changes.

Several board members raised concern over the multi‑year guarantee and the scale of the proposed increases. Members questioned whether the district should accept a 5‑year term that spreads replacement costs over five years (and thereby reduces the annual percentage) rather than a shorter renewal or a new competitive procurement. One member said the cumulative effect of 8.95 percent annual increases over five years would be fiscally significant for the district; other members asked staff to pursue renegotiation on specific clauses such as the fleet‑age requirement and the schedule for required bus replacement. A number of board members also urged staff to gather additional detail on the fleet age, the district’s fuel purchasing options, and whether contract language could be changed to limit capital obligations.

A motion to approve the B&B contract extension was moved and seconded during the meeting. After an extended discussion and requests for additional information, the board did not proceed to a final roll‑call vote; the chair said no action was taken and staff was directed to follow up on the questions raised and return with additional detail or negotiated options.

What happens next: Staff said they would follow up with the contractor to seek clarification and potential revisions to the proposed deal, and to gather written information about the contractor’s fleet age, replacement schedule, insurance and labor cost drivers, and the financial consequences of alternative contract lengths.

Ending: The board left the item open for further negotiation rather than approving the proposed extension at the meeting.