District staff told the Littlestown Area School District board that the district must choose between raising in-house pay for bus drivers or issuing a request for proposals (RFP) to outsource transportation, after a period of driver losses and rising contractor pay.

The staff presentation outlined two options: (1) maintain transportation in house and raise pay to be competitive with contractors (the presentation discussed operating scenarios using $140–$150 per day driver pay), and (2) issue an RFP for an outside contractor for a multi-year contract (staff described typical contract lengths of four to seven years). "The first option is, maintain transportation services in house," a district staff member said during the presentation.

The district compared current private-contractor pay ranges and said some contractors pay drivers between $125 and $145 per day. Staff said a fully staffed in-house scenario at the higher daily rates would significantly increase the district’s payroll costs; staff presented a range of possible additional annual costs but did not provide a single, final budget number. Staff also estimated that outsourcing could be in the same general annual cost range as the district’s current combined transportation budget; staff said an initial estimate was about $1.315 million a year versus current budgeted totals “close to $1.4 million.”

Board member Tom asked how many nearby districts run transportation in house; a district staff member replied, "We are one of the 3," indicating that most comparable districts had moved to outsourced models. Staff said districts commonly move to contracts because the cost of keeping services in house can require tax increases and because private contractors sometimes accept lower margins to win bids.

Staff described non-financial considerations raised during the discussion: continuity for students (having the same driver each day), stability for drivers, and contractual protections. Staff said a contractor agreement would typically include an interview and first-refusal process for current employees so the contractor could hire drivers who already know routes and students. "...the contractor has to do an interview our current employees," staff said.

Board members and staff recounted recent staffing losses: several drivers were lost to contractors in recent months and others left for retirement or other reasons. Staff said the district currently has six in-house drivers and five routes handled by contractors, with turnover since COVID-19 contributing to vacancies.

Several board members expressed concern about long-term price escalations under a contract. One board member warned that initial contract rates can look favorable early in a contract but may increase later. Staff responded that RFPs can be structured to seek multi-year guarantees and to consolidate all district transportation services (regular routes, athletics, special needs, substitute drivers) into a single contract to seek scale advantages.

No formal motion or vote to adopt either option was recorded during the meeting. Staff presented the two paths and answered board questions; the board discussion remained exploratory.

Next steps discussed during the meeting included additional cost modeling and RFP planning if the board directs staff to pursue outsourcing later. As of the meeting record provided, no formal direction to issue an RFP or to set a specific in-house pay rate had been made.