Lewiston schools warn transportation contract jump will drive next year’s budget; district outlines routing and special‑ed obligations
Loading...
Summary
District transportation director told the school committee that a new contract and aging fleet help explain a roughly 45% contract increase, noting the district buses about 85% of eligible students, runs more than 500 daily routes and relies on three vetted alternative providers for out‑of‑district placements.
Alyssa, Lewiston Public Schools’ director of transportation and nutrition, told the school committee on March 25 that transportation is one of the largest cost drivers in the superintendent’s proposed FY27 budget and that a new contract and aging fleet contribute to a substantial increase in contractor costs. “We are busing 85% of all eligible students in the district right now,” Alyssa said, and described more than 500 AM/PM route pairings plus dozens of van and alternative‑provider runs to serve students with specialized placement needs.
The district’s presentation traced the increase to multiple factors: contractual rate changes in a new Student Transportation of America agreement, rising fuel expenses (procured for the district through the city), more out‑of‑district special‑education runs and investments in routing technology. Alyssa said the city “dictates the cost at the pumps” when it procures bulk fuel for municipal fleets and that the transportation contract requires the district to pay the fuel bill. Committee members pressed whether the district is protected from fuel volatility; Alyssa and Superintendent Jake Langley said the city typically issues a memo setting the fuel rate for the fiscal year and that provisions for exigent circumstances may exist.
The district emphasized operational levers to limit cost growth: route optimization with routing software and driver tablets, consolidating low‑ridership routes, and shifting vehicle block contracts from 4‑hour to 6‑hour blocks so some runs can be absorbed without adding vehicles. “If I see a bus only has 10 kids on it, I’m going to be looking to collapse that route with another bus,” Alyssa said, adding that optimization depends on consistent ridership and accurate parent opt‑in data.
Committee members and drivers described the daily workload and equipment reliability problems that make optimization difficult. One committee member who drives routes said buses are rarely idle between runs and welcomed the new contract’s promise of newer vehicles and improved safety features such as anti‑pinch door systems and upgraded stop‑arm illumination. The district also confirmed it uses three vetted alternative transportation providers for contracted runs the main carrier cannot cover; vendors undergo insurance and background checks and are monitored via GPS and, in some cases, onboard cameras.
The administration said some transportation overages this year are tied to McKinney‑Vento obligations and special‑education placements that are legally required and billed back where appropriate; those reimbursements generally hit the special‑education budget line rather than operations. Officials did not present a final FY27 transportation tally at the meeting but said they are working to reconcile current‑year billing and to present scenario graphics at a follow‑up meeting.
What’s next: The committee requested additional breakdowns and scenario comparisons and directed the administration to include transportation impact figures when it circulates proposed budget options ahead of the next workshop.
