Citizen Portal
Sign In

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

Get email alerts on the Student Travel topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Senior class seeks approval for 5‑night Royal Caribbean cruise to Bermuda; board delays decision pending insurance and logistics

Greenville Central School District Board of Education · February 10, 2026
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

Students and advisers proposed a five‑night Royal Caribbean cruise to Bermuda for the Class of 2026. The board praised the educational elements but declined to approve the trip tonight, asking advisers to provide insurance, medical‑rider and logistical details and evidence of parent support.

Members of Greenville Central School District’s senior class presented a proposal on Feb. 9, 2026, for a five‑night Royal Caribbean cruise to Bermuda, departing from New Jersey. The senior class president (speaker 5) told the board the class voted by a large majority for a destination trip and said group rates plus pending grants would reduce cost barriers for families. "We are here today to propose... our Royal Caribbean cruise to Bermuda departing from New Jersey," the presenter said.

The students and advisers described the trip as largely all‑inclusive — meals, gratuities and two excursions per student were included in the package — and said a pending GEF grant would cover train transportation to the port. Presenters also described security procedures: bags screened by x‑ray at embarkation, metal detectors, school‑supervised bag searches before boarding the school bus, chaperone groups on the ship and cruise card flags that, according to the presenters, can be set to prohibit gambling and alcohol charges for student cards.

Board members pressed for specifics. The chair (speaker 1) said, "I'm not comfortable with it because that is a huge exposure," citing district liability if an incident occurred on a commercial cruise ship. Other trustees asked whether the district would carry exposure on its insurance policies or whether the cruise’s insurance would suffice; presenters said cruise pricing includes insurance but the district requested the advisers provide the insurer’s coverage details and any supplemental riders for review.

Trustees also asked about participation, cost and safeguards for students who may not be able to afford the trip. Presenters said current pricing was based on a 45‑student block with five chaperones included; they acknowledged they did not yet have firm commitments from 45 paying students and said the class uses fundraising to reduce individual costs. The presenters offered alternative, lower‑cost itineraries (two‑day, one‑night Philadelphia option) as a backup if the cruise did not reach minimum bookings.

On safety, trustees sought clarification about casino and alcohol access on the ship. Presenters replied that the ship’s casino and certain restaurants have separate entrances and that student cards would be flagged to prevent gambling or alcohol purchases; the presenters emphasized chaperone supervision and that the ship carries medical staff. Nevertheless, trustees requested documented confirmation of those controls and of how disciplinary incidents would be handled while at sea.

The board declined to act on the proposal that evening and asked the advisers to supply: the cruise insurer’s policy and any supplemental medical riders; a ship floor plan and the specific ship accommodations (presenters named Liberty of the Seas); a clearer accounting of per‑student cost and the effect of changing participant counts; and documentation that parents support the proposal. The board will revisit the request after reviewing the requested materials.

Clarifying details from the meeting: advisers referenced a GEF grant to cover train travel, described five chaperones included in the block, and identified the ship as Liberty of the Seas. The presenters at times used a different numeric formatting (one line in the transcript indicated "$9.82" while board members referred to a $982 per‑student figure); the board asked for written cost documentation to resolve that inconsistency.

The next procedural step is for the student advisers to submit the insurance and logistical documentation the board requested. The board did not vote to approve or deny the trip on Feb. 9.

Provenance: Topic introduction at SEG 093; discussion concluded at SEG 892.