District 65 board reopens transportation policy amid school consolidation planning

The District 65 Committee of the Whole on Aug. 4 reopened discussion of district transportation policy as part of planning for school consolidations, focusing on walkable boundaries, hazard assessments and budget trade-offs. Board members, administrators and staff debated how to reconcile the state’s 1.5-mile expectation for student transportation with local choices about crossing guards, start times and service to magnet or specialty schools. The public’s first speaker, William Jackson, told the board he was concerned that new housing built for residents who do not own cars could make it harder for parents to participate in school life if transportation planning concentrates only on students. “Parents and guardians will not be bussed to school,” Jackson said. Why it matters: Transportation is a major ongoing line item in the district budget and intersects with school consolidation decisions. Changes to who gets bused will alter costs, attendance logistics, and school-boundary maps used for enrollment and magnet programs. Discussion highlights - Legal baseline: Staff reminded the board that Illinois school code sets a common guideline of 1.5 miles for required transportation eligibility; the district currently does not provide transportation for some students beyond that distance. Board members asked whether the district’s desired policy should be stricter or more permissive than that statutory baseline. (Transcript references: school code, IDOT hazard criteria.) - Scope and numbers: Staff estimated roughly 197 middle-school students live beyond 1.5 miles and are not currently provided district transportation for the upcoming school year; that figure was described as a rough enrollment estimate that will be refined as registration closes. - Safety and hazards: Lou Gatta’s hazard review (IDOT criteria) was cited: the IDOT point threshold uses traffic volume, speed, road width, student age and crossing type; Lou and staff said intersections with crossing guards are less likely to meet IDOT hazard thresholds. The board discussed how crossing-guard placement can change whether a walking route is considered a hazard. - Costs and contracts: Staff reported an intergovernmental agreement with the City of Evanston for crossing guards that runs through June 30, 2027; the district would assume full crossing-guard costs after that date. Estimated cost for FY26–27 for crossing guards was cited at about $700,000 and projected to grow roughly 5% annually if unchanged. - Operations and efficiencies: Staff credited recent routing and scheduling changes for transportation savings made in FY25 and noted opportunities to verify bus utilization (students routed vs. students actually riding) early in the school year. - Community engagement and modelling: Board members repeatedly urged more community input before policy changes and asked staff to create scenario models that project financial impact, student counts affected, and safe walkability maps for proposed boundaries. Staff said no district-wide family survey had been deployed yet; principals and administrators have been surveyed. - Start-time analysis: Board members requested analysis of potential transportation savings from switching middle- and elementary-school start times to leverage double routes; staff agreed to investigate feasibility. What the board directed or decided - No immediate policy changes: Staff said explicitly the district would not alter routes or stop transportation services for the imminent school year starting in about two weeks; any policy changes would be for the following year and tied to consolidation decisions. - Modeling and engagement: The board asked staff to produce modeling scenarios that show the transportation cost and student-impact implications of different boundary and ride-eligibility choices and to bring options to the board and to the SDRP (school design/reconfiguration) process. Board members emphasized these models should be visual (block-level walkability) to aid public feedback. Outstanding items and next steps - Staff will provide transportation modelling tied to proposed consolidation scenarios and refine counts of students beyond 1.5 miles. - Staff will present results of utilization checks (routed students vs. riders) during the first months of the school year. - The board asked administration to consider targeted community engagement (surveys or facilitated conversations) and to return with proposals on process and timing. Ending Board members stressed student safety as the core principle guiding any cost trade-offs. Several members suggested developing a set of guiding principles — with student safety first — to govern any future policy choices on walking distances, crossing guards and cost-sharing with families.