Parent warns ISD 196 board court ruling leaves families without recourse after 2017 crash

Dr. Gina Rivas Castro, a parent of students who previously rode District 196 buses, told the school board that a 2017 crash at Argenta Trail and 70th Street left her family injured and later blocked their civil claim because of a court ruling she said invoked a Minnesota statute that grants official immunity to district-employed drivers.

The court "specifically granted the driver official immunity and then extended vicarious official immunity to the entire school district, effectively blocking any claim for damages," Rivas Castro said. She told the board she had previously warned district staff about the stop location and that the road has since been widened from two lanes to four.

Rivas Castro said the immunity was applied despite what she described as a preventable situation: "Prior to the accident, I had repeatedly warned the district about the dangerous placement of this bus stop located at Argenta Trail and Seventieth Street where vehicles consistently traveled at high speeds."

Why this matters: Rivas Castro told the board the Court of Appeals ruling creates a legal difference between drivers employed directly by a district (who may receive official immunity under state law) and drivers supplied by private contractors or private schools, who do not receive the same statutory protection. She said the family has borne ongoing medical costs and future surgeries and urged the board to act to prevent other families from losing legal recourse after preventable incidents.

Rivas Castro asked the board to review district policies and practices for accident investigation and driver training and to inform parents about what she called "this immunity gap," saying: "I urge this board to review policies regarding accident investigation and driver training, inform parents about this immunity gap so they can make informed decisions prior to putting their children on the school buses."

Board members did not take action during the special communications portion; the item was presented as public comment. The speaker said she had repeatedly raised concerns about the bus stop placement and that the district agreed to relocate the stop only after sustained advocacy, which she said prioritized schedule efficiency over safety.

The board did not provide a formal response during the meeting; board members and administrators may follow up with the speaker afterward, per the board's special communications practice.

Ending: The remarks closed the special communications segment of the meeting. The district did not cite a specific statutory citation during the presentation; Rivas Castro referred generically to "a Minnesota statute" and to a Court of Appeals decision. The board did not take formal action during the meeting on the matters raised.