Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Transportation topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Darien schools outline transportation overhaul, depot timeline and propane bus plan

AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

District staff briefed the Darien Board of Education on a multi-part transportation plan including an in-house special education fleet, a phased replacement to propane buses to meet Connecticut requirements, ridership details, and a multi-year timetable for pursuing a bus depot.

Darien School District officials presented a multi-part transportation update Friday that outlined changes to special education routing, a multi-year plan to replace diesel buses with propane, and a recommended timeline for pursuing a district bus depot.

District staff said the special-education service that had been contracted out was brought in-house this year, creating a 15-vehicle fleet that the district expects to save about $1.1 million next year compared with the prior contracted model. “We do have 25 home-to-school buses,” the presenter said, “and this year…we did bring that all in house, and we operate a fleet of 15 vehicles for both in and out of district.”

The update gave context for the savings and rising costs. District staff said total student enrollment is about 4,600, with roughly 3,300 students eligible for home-to-school transportation under district policy and about 2,000 students riding buses on a typical day. Ridership per school varies sharply — a low of about 83 at one elementary and roughly 527 at Middlesex — and the district said middle schools carry the highest share of riders.

Officials described a transition to propane buses as the district’s chosen compliance path under the Connecticut Clean Air Act requirement to move away from diesel by 2030. The district plans to add about five propane buses per year for five years, a choice staff said was driven by depot infrastructure limitations and lower fueling costs compared with electric buses. Town and district leaders have committed roughly $1.18 million for vehicle acquisition; staff said that investment would be returned within about two years given current savings assumptions.

Board members pressed staff on driver shortages and athletics transportation. First Student remains the sole regular bidder for home-to-school contracts, staff said, and driver availability constrains afternoon athletic transports: the contractor provides three buses for athletics most days, leaving the district to hire charters when more trips run simultaneously. Staff said a guaranteed three-driver minimum was now written into the contract after recent negotiations.

The board discussed a bus depot as a multiyear project. Staff outlined barriers: a depot needs roughly 1.5–2 acres, mechanics and site staff, and timing aligned with contract expirations to avoid breaking the current First Student lease in Stamford. Staff recommended timing any depot acquisition to coincide with the end of the district’s multi-year contract (roughly four years away) so a new vendor could bid with an identified parking/maintenance site.

Board members requested follow-ups including: detailed ridership vs. total enrollment charts for each school, tardiness metrics that might be related to bus schedules, longer-term vendor-bid scenarios if a depot were acquired, and additional outreach to town bodies before pursuing site acquisition. Staff said the district uses VersaTrans for routing and had engaged an external router to review efficiency.

The update concluded with operational details: driver training requirements, a reminder that the chain of parent concerns begins with the director of transportation and escalates to the superintendent, and a note that magnet-school and out-of-district routes remain handled on a case-by-case basis.

Less-urgent items — including discussions about sidewalk studies near schools and a possible future facilities subcommittee review of depot options — were left for staff and board follow-up.

Ending: The board asked staff to return with the ridership-by-school table, a timeline tied to the current contract’s end, and a budgeted memo on potential depot costs and impacts.