AUSTIN, Texas (June 21, 2007) — While some in Texas were surprised and upset by Gov. Rick Perry’s veto of a bill banning unnecessary school bus idling that won strong support in both the house and senate, some attendees at the Texas Association for Pupil Transportation’s 34th Annual Conference and Trade Show in Waco were relieved when they heard the news.

The bill would have amended the state education code to prohibit school buses form idling while parked at a school. But it also would have made an exception for the “minimum time necessary to heat or cool the bus before departure, provided that the engine is turned off when a student is embarking or disembarking” or when accommodating special needs students.

Jim Norman, Texas Association of Pupil Transportation

Jim Norman, TAPT’s outgoing president, was concerned that the bill would not have met the varied needs of all of Texas’ districts.

“I think the governor did the right thing,” Norman said.

In his note accompanying the veto, Gov. Perry said any anti-idling should be “a matter of policy decided on the local level.”

Educators should focus on “more pressing priorities,” Perry wrote, including teaching a standards based curriculum, proving extra-curricular activities and other “core functions of our education system.”

The governor’s explanation did not satisfy the bill’s author, Rep. Scott Hochberg. Hochberg said the governor’s answers were “not particularly informative” and called the veto “a bad policy decision on (the governor’s) part.”

Audrey Barrett a representative from the Texas office of Public Citizen, the non-profit consumer advocacy organization that brought the idea for the bill to Hochberg, said she was surprised by the governor’s veto because the bill had no cost associated with it and did not previously meet objection.

“It defied common sense,” Barret said.

While representatives from environmental groups, teachers groups and boards of education testified before the house and senate on the bill, no pupil transportation professionals were included in either testimony.

Pam McCurdy, Texas’ acting director of pupil transportation, said many schools have already adopted anti-idling policies voluntarily.

“Most people are already idling as little as possible and we’ve encouraged this,” said McCurdy. “Everyone is concerned with anything that affects our students.”

Hochberg said his bill was modeled on a policy developed by Houston ISD, the district he represents. Since 2002, Houston has been involved in anti-idling programs. Austin ISD has adopted similar policies.

According to Barret, these larger districts tend to be more aware of environmental issues and bill would have provided an avenue for school boards to discuss them in relation to idling.

In closing his note, the governor said he was concerned that “schools would have a difficult time enforcing this law.”

At this writing, transportation directors from Austin and Houston were unavailable for comment on their experience enforcing anti-idling policies.