Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Transportation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board hears plan to bring student transportation in‑house; officials cite roughly $500,000 in potential savings and new start‑time options
Summary
District officials presented a plan to move busing from contractors to an in‑house operation for 2026–27, citing improved operational control, reduced student time on buses, estimated annual savings of about $500,000, and two proposed school‑start schedules; public commenters raised parking, early pickup and pay‑equity concerns.
District staff presented a plan to return student transportation to an in‑house model for the 2026–27 school year, saying doing so would improve scheduling, reduce student time on buses and keep contractor profit inside the district. The presenter said the district estimates roughly $500,000 in annual savings by operating its own fleet and cited potential new revenue from providing trips for other districts.
Key operational proposals included hiring roughly 24 daily route drivers as part‑time employees (the presenter cited about 29.5 hours per week and an annual pay figure of about $35,000 for drivers), running a combined fleet of large buses (the district currently has 30 buses but expects fewer on the road at once with staggered starts), and expanding safety and training programs including random drug testing, fingerprinting and DOT‑required inspections.
The district proposed two start‑time options to reduce on‑bus downtime and improve traffic flow: Option A (example times 7:30/8:30/9:30) and Option B (the same pattern shifted 15 minutes later). Officials said they would survey parents (an email/survey was planned to be distributed and close by Sunday) and expected a decision by the next Tuesday.
The presenter described technology investments including GPS and a parent app to provide real‑time bus location alerts, and said maintenance would be handled through a contract (Shephard) rather than by building a new maintenance garage.
Public comment focused on practical concerns. A resident, Edward Lucas, questioned where 15 full‑size buses would be parked and warned that earlier start times could require very early pickups for some out‑of‑district students (he cited possible 6:15 a.m. pickups). A longtime transportation employee and other commenters expressed skepticism that part‑time schedules would cover long routes and said the district may still need significant full‑time driver capacity.
Concerns about compensation surfaced in public comment as well: a teacher raised questions about large reported increases in the transportation supervisor’s salary and asked the board to explain how the district determined those raises and how they align with teacher salary increases. The transcript records the teacher’s request for public justification but does not record a response with details resolving the question.
No formal vote to adopt the in‑house transportation plan occurred at the meeting; the board presented the options and said it would gather parent survey data and finalize decisions in the coming week.
