HEADLINES
S.C. House to Study Localizing School-Bus Operations
By Michelle Fisher Student transporters have kept an eye on a South Carolina bill
that would turn over the state-run busing system to individual school districts, but the decision to transfer power has been put off for now. Te House (when?) voted 103-2 to replace the origi- nal bill with a study committee to look into the matter. “It must still be passed by the Senate and signed by Gov. Haley for
the proposed study committee to begin its work,” said Jay Ragley, legislative analyst for the South Carolina Department of Education. Te new version of H.4610 calls for the committee to provide
its final report to each house of the General Assembly and to Gov. Nikki Haley’s office no later than Jan. 1, 2013, according to the bill. Te revision came about after consensus could not be reached
on whether to require the state’s school districts to oversee stu- dent transportation services. South Carolina is the only state in the country that still owns and maintains school buses. Ragley noted that State Superintendent of Education Mick Zais
takes no public position on the proposal to hand over the state-run school bus system to local school districts. Additionally, the state superintendent opposes neither school districts being allowed to maintain their own student transportation services nor contract them out. Darryl Webb, president of the South Carolina Association for
Pupil Transportation, said SCAPT supports the amendment of the bill because it was “too aggressive” in the dates for imple- mentation. It originally required districts to decide by this year whether they would keep school bus operations in-house or out- source to a private contractor. “By having a study committee to find all the advantages or dis-
advantages of the system, districts could make a more informed decision of the options available to them,” said Webb. NSTA President Magda Dimmendaal said the organization
applauds Gov. Haley and the sponsors of the original bill for rec- ognizing that outsourcing could save the state millions, while also updating the oldest fleet in the nation. Te average school bus is 14 years old and has logged more than 200,000 miles. “NSTA members want the change from state-controlled to
school district–controlled to be successful. Tat’s what’s most important for the students, parents and school districts,” said Dimmendaal. “In my opinion, a pilot project outsourcing the school bus transportation in several school districts across the state next year would be a good compromise. A slow, deliberate change, properly funded, over the next few years will be more successful than an all-or-nothing approach.”
28 School Transportation News Magazine June 2012
FUNDING STILL UP IN THE AIR School officials and lawmakers alike have worried a switch
to privatization could end up costing school districts more. Comments made in the online School Transportation News LinkedIn group indicate ongoing concern over proper state re- imbursement funding to districts. “School districts are very concerned about this aspect of the
bill,” Webb told STN, adding that the state has a law known as ACT388, passed in 2006, that limits a school district’s ability to raise the local property tax rate. “Te additional costs of running buses, either by contract or district ownership, is looked at as a need to increase in local millage above that allowed by ACT388. To do that would require a referendum to be proposed to the districts’ electorate.” SCAPT hopes the study committee will “find some common
ground to build from on this issue,” Webb continued. Te cost of both replacing and maintaining school buses has
been a concern over at Dorchester School District Two, which opted last year to privatize the management and operations of the fleet — becoming the third district in the state to do so. “What we’re concerned about is how that will happen as far
as financial implications,” said Allyson Duke, the district’s chief financial officer. “Nine of our state buses are over 15 years old. If they mandate replacement after a certain number of years, that’s another unfunded mandate. At one time, the bill stated that buses over 15 years had to be replaced and then it was 12 years.” Duke explained that district officials decided on privatization
after their transportation director and assistant transportation director retired. Tey had also been watching nearby Charleston County School District work well with Durham School Services since 1995. District spokeswoman Pat Raynor noted the idea was on the
table for quite some time. “We held a discussion for several years about whether to
outsource for more efficient service — for folks to handle trans- portation that specialize in it,” said Raynor. She added that county school districts have been allowed to
outsource part or all of their transportation fleet operations and management, which includes the hiring of drivers. At this writing, Gov. Haley’s office had not responded to sev-
eral requests for comment on potential school bus privatization and the role unions might play. Te governor has repeatedly voiced her opposition to unions since taking office last year. ■
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68