Community Transportation Issue
in School Bus Contractor Crosshair

By Julie Metea

Consolidating school transportation with public transit could be a viable solution for dwindling dollars, but the path is full of potholes for communities that misunderstand the rules and break them. Those that cross the line may encounter legal and regulatory tangles and risk losing government funding.

Those that tread well realize efficiencies and cost savings. Success usually comes when students, older ones in particular, use existing public transit routes to get to school. The school district may provide discounted tickets, while reaping a benefit of relief to its own transportation budget. A good example is New York City.

The matter thickens when it comes to student safety and federal funding rules. Younger students often require more safety procedures than high school students. Buses for the general public neither come equipped with extra provisions nor are required to make enhancements for student safety.

Trouble brews when the public transportation system re-configures routes to create new paths to schools that don’t necessarily benefit the general public. This scenario violates what’s called the St. Germain Agreement between the public and school sectors, also known as tripper service. A consequence is organizations risk losing precious federal funding.

“The issue is whether they’re doing legal tripper service or illegal service,” said Robin Leeds, an industry specialist with the National School Transportation Association. ”Legal tripper service makes no distinction between student and public. Students have to be treated like everyone else.”

Rare Road to Success
A long-standing tradition of shared transportation exists in Altoona, Pa., where the community has successfully integrated pupils and the general public. The Altoona Metro Transit Authority (AMTRAN) provides fixed-route service to the general public. Through a 70-year arrangement, AMTRAN also provides transportation for Altoona Area School District and local private schools.

“We’ve been doing it such a long time, but it really isn’t very common,” said Eric Wolf, AMTRAN’s general manager. “We’re only taking students that are close to regular bus routes. About 25 percent. Our private contractor carries the majority of yellow bus students. It works quite well.”

AMTRAN transports only secondary and high school students for the public schools and a few elementary students for parochial schools. The unique arrangement between the school district, AMTRAN and a private contractor developed out of necessity. Beginning in the late 1960s, public schools were required by federal law to provide access for students. Since AMTRAN was already providing the transit for school children, the school district simply opted to formalize the service.

AMTRAN delivers this coordinated service using regular transit-style coaches. Each of the 15 tripper routes is open to everyone and timetables are published. Everyone pays a fare except certain students in the district who are eligible for free passes.

There’s special driver training upon hire with a refresher course for all drivers prior to the start of each school year. The school district also provides two types of training for students; one for students who ride school buses and the other for pupils who ride AMTRAN’s public transit system.

Road to Trouble
It hasn’t gone as well in Rochester, N.Y., where the public transporter is in the middle of a lawsuit and is in jeopardy of losing federal funding. It goes like a busing soap opera, but the situation is testing transportation boundaries.

The Rochester Genesee Regional Transportation Authority (RGRTA) had been providing legal tripper service for the past 12 years. Then last year, the school district decided to replace school bus routes with new public transit routes and new stops on school grounds.

The United Food & Commercial Workers District Union sued, claiming a subsidy agreement with the local school district violated a Federal Transit Administration (FTA) regulation. The lawsuit accuses RGRTA of setting up special routes to specifically transport students, a practice the union claimed had displaced 70 regular education routes provided by Laidlaw Education Services.

The FTA twice investigated, found RGRTA in violation both times and ordered it to cease and desist. Or else, no more funding. RGRTA failed to stop, but a federal district judge has twice ordered a temporary stay to avoid disrupting transportation amid the current school year. RGRTA still stands its ground as the matter heads back to court.

“The FTA’s reversal of a 12-year long standing approval of this service is puzzling, especially when this service is offered by federally-funded transportation systems all across the country,” wrote Jacqueline Halldow, an RGRTA spokesperson. The benefits of this partnership to the school district, community and students are significant. Regional Transit Service, Inc. and the Rochester City School District provide service that both saves taxpayers money and has improved attendance in city schools 10 percent.”

Other industry watchers weigh the losses to other parties, such as smaller private contractors that are not eligible for the same federal funding.

“I know people who had to sell their businesses and close operations because (public transit organizations) are nibbling away the business,” said John Corr, president of Trans Group and chair of NSTA’s government relations committee. “When I see a group like Rochester, with an illegal service, I get angry that they disagree. The whole intent for tripper service is to pass, not to begin or end, at a school. That’s school service.”

Widening Public Views
A few other matters concern school transportation proponents. One is the absence of extra security for students on a public transit vehicle. There are at least 10 safety features on school buses that are not required on public buses, such as a stop arm, alternately flashing warning lights, roll-over protection, fuel tank “integrity,” small windows, yellow paint, and school bus lettering.

Parents also often dislike the fact that their children are mixed with the general public, thus increasing the security risk.

“They like the kids in a closed exclusive system. Everybody in school transportation believes kids belong in school buses. They are safer in buses than any other vehicle,” said Leeds.

Public transportation associations, such as the Community Transportation Association of America (CTAA), advocate transporting students safely in large or shuttle buses within legal and ethical boundaries.

“We are looking to transport kids in shuttle buses as long as it’s not in violation of the tripper service rules. This comes from a recommendation on better collaboration between transit and schools,” said CTAA spokesman Scott Bogren. “If you’re a private entity asking why the government is competing with my business, this is the issue. How do you wipe out the competition perception?”

The American Public Transportation Association (APTA) represents 90 percent of public transportation organizations and properties. While it doesn’t fully advise members on this issue, it does support communities that can make it work.

“Unfortunately, changing routes is not the best scenario. If in place, it’s a good solution,” said Jeff Hiott, APTA’s program manager. “Most of the funding is paid by taxes, and it can be a good service. The benefit would be for the school system. If there’s public bus service in place to assist the school district, it’s a good solution.”

Still others see the benefit of co-ops in a reverse scenario — using idle school buses to help the community. This can be a particular plus in rural communities where public transit is sparse.

“There are downtimes in the summer. There are a lot of communities that want to move (senior citizens), and they could fill the hole with school buses. There’s real opportunity to do this,” added Bogren.

Despite the synergy opportunities, NSTA and FTA are scoping out those groups that will potentially overstep the rules and regulations currently in place. NTSA recently filed a violation report against the public transportation system in Dayton, Ohio. While FTA had yet to respond to the report as of this writing, NSTA has launched an investigation on the bus routing as it pertains to school transportation.

“This is going to be a priority to go after the violations and make an issue that this is wrong,” Leeds added.