Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Student Transportation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Parent alleges bus driver skipped stops, segregated students and targeted her son
Summary
At a Waterford Board of Education meeting, parent Caris Rinsky urged the board to investigate a contracted bus driver she says changed her son’s stop, skipped routes, and singled him out over a disability, potentially violating his 504 plan; she said requested video evidence exists but the issues persist.
Caris Rinsky told the Waterford Board of Education that problems with the district’s contracted bus service began last fall when a driver allegedly moved her son’s stop and drove past him at the new location, then later told her son he could sit with female classmates only if he agreed to change his stop. Rinsky said the driver’s behavior has left her son uncomfortable, deprived him of his school transportation and social time, and forced her to drive him to and from school.
Rinsky said she raised the matter with Great Neck Principal Shay and with district staff (Mr. Mancini and Mr. Gard), and that the principal requested video from the bus company. "She did get it, but it is an audible," Rinsky said at the meeting, adding that she had sent an earlier email to district staff documenting the incidents.
Rinsky described multiple operational failures: the driver allegedly changed stops without notice, skipped students’ stops during runs that sometimes lasted nearly an hour, and failed to notify parents or the school when students were delayed. "Buses are supposed to leave Great Neck by 3:20," she said, noting one instance when a bus arrived at the community center near 3:30 and students were reportedly directed on the bus to tell the driver where to stop.
Rinsky asked the board to review contractual and safety obligations, noting potential violations of the student’s 504 plan and suggesting the district’s current arrangements put staff and students in an unsafe ratio during dismissal. She provided board members copies of prior emails to district officials and asked the board to demand corrective action from the bus vendor.
The board did not take immediate formal action on the complaint during the meeting; the superintendent and school staff were present during the public comment period and acknowledged receipt of the materials and prior contacts. Board members did not dispute the parent’s description but did not announce a timeline for an investigation at the meeting.
What’s next: The parent asked the board to pursue the vendor and to ensure safe, contract-compliant transportation for students; district staff said they had obtained at least some evidence and will follow up internally.
