Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2012-09-06-STAS-min Ad Hoc School Transportation and Safety Study Committee September 6, 2012 at 9am Conference Room, Central Administration Blg Meeting Minutes 1 Attending Judy Crocker, Elaine Dratch (TAC), MaryEllen Dunn (Asst Superintendent), Deb Mauger (Selectmen), Sharon Kendall, Craig Weeks Guest Bonnie Brown 2. Meeting minutes were not available for review. 3 School Bus Registration Update Total enrollment figures as of Aug 31st were reviewed These included • 2049 regular passes and 211 Flexpasses were sold for a total of 2260 (39%) • The waitlist includes 150 students • Highest registration - Clarke (63%), Bowman (53%), and Diamond (44%) • Lowest- Fiske and LHS (25%) • Greatest increase in bus ridership - Estabrook(14%), Bowman (10%),LHS (7%) • The school bus fleet added 4 buses and routes to LHS, Bowman, Clarke, Diamond, Estabrook, and Hastings. No change to bus routes is needed for Bridge and Harrington, and Fiske lost a bus There is the possibility of adding more HS routes and one elementary route with the present fleet • Regarding FY13 additional bus programming, the Flexpass has 151 subscribers at LHS, 34 at Clarke, and 26 at Diamond 174 students are being transported to 7 programs through the elementary after-school destinations service C&W Buses have also improved their documentation procedure for bus discipline interactions FY13 Bus Ridership/School as of Aua 31. 2012 School FY13 FY12 Chanae(FY13-FY12) Bowman 53% 43% +10 Bridge 41% 37% +4% Clarke 63% 58% +5% Diamond 44% 41% +3% Estabrook 43% 29% +14% Fiske 25% 21% +4% Harrington 38% 32% +6% Hastings 37% 32% +5% LHS 25% 18% +7% TOTAL AVG 39% 33% RANGE 25%-63% 18%-58% +3% to +14% The financial report involving TM Articles 4 and 17 for FY13 transportation will not be available until late October During the first two weeks of school, problems that have arisen from offering new services,the increased number of students using the bus, and the new bus routes include: • Parents registered for the bus but did not pay • Parents paid but did not register • Parents moved and did not inform LPS • Students without assigned LPS identification numbers • Some parents and bus drivers not following new bus routes • Some schools were unprepared for additional buses and/or new after-school options • Limited Transportation staffing proved to be insufficient to address parent concerns and inquiries • Local road construction In looking at options to improve bus service, interim solutions discussed included providing human intervention for monitoring and observing bus route timing and reliabilitya few weeks into the school year.As a follow-up to the bus route dry runs that C&W performs before school begins, any data gathered could help troubleshoot and smooth overany bus route issues C&W has been responsive to the problems that have arisen and shares some of the same frustrations as the LPS Transportation Office A few members of the Committee volunteered to monitor buses if needed and would be Cori checked with LPS Without GPS and cameras, it is very difficult and time intensive to monitor and evaluate bus routes Ms Dunn estimated that this technology equipment and contract would cost$1500-$2000/bus or$36,000 for 18 buses. Other technology would include an electronic chip placed in the student bus passes This would trigger the bus GPS so that students can be tracked as they load and unload buses Ms. Dunn reported that a capital request would need to be made in order to accelerate this plan as it is presently included later in the 5-yr C&W contract The Committee decided that the next Minuteman article should focus on the concerns of the public expressed thus far into the school year The sheer logistics of increased number of student riders and the new services being provided have met mismatched expectations with some parents and staff Parent patience will be needed as Transportation and C&W attempt to resolve these issues This will require the cooperation of all parties The PTA President's Council will also be enlisted to offer assistance with parent expectations 4. PTA President Council Update A) An update was presented of recent STS action items and the school bus registration update (given Aug 31, 2012 figures) by Sharon Kendall,Jessie Steigerwald, and Judy Crocker Included were schools listed by their percentage enrollment for FY13, FY12, the change seen in FY12 vs FY13. It should be noted that incorrect figures were reported for the FY13 additional number of student bus riders/school and will be corrected B) The Draft School Improvement Plan template of school transportation goals was discussed It is a work-in-progress with Faculty,Administration, and School Committee. It will be a discussion point at the fall training for School Council representatives It also underscores the need for demonstrated PTA/parent involvement There was not time to engage in a dialogue of how best to achieve the latter and will be discussed at a future date. C) Safety Greeter Kits were distributed to each school in mid-August by Ms Dunn The purpose of these kits is to help positively communicate common school drop- off and pick-up procedures for our schools Members of the PTA Presidents Council reported that they were not able to participate the Safety Greeter Program due to time and volunteer constraints It appears that the group was not clear on the short timeline in which this initiative would have to be carried out and nor that the STS was hoping to enlist each school's elected representation through the PTA Executive Board While the members thought the premise behind the program to be sound, some voiced their concerns on interacting directly with parents These individuals felt that such matters are best left to their principals The members appreciated the initiative and felt it may be able to be put into service in the future. It was noted that the reflective vests included in the kit should be worn by any staff or volunteer who works directly in a roadway, driveway, crosswalk or the like for their own personal safety A directive from Cpt Ferro and/or Ms Dunn to school personal should be communicated in early Sept During the STS discussion following the update, Ms Dunn reported that new emergency response regulations may overlap with some of the components of the kit, such as the use of reflective vests. 5 Draft of suggested school improvements as they relate to school transportation services usingthe LPS SIP goal template Members had been asked to examine the draft and add their suggestions Due to time constraints,the conversation was tabled until the next meeting 6 New business • Ray Drapeau (Facilities), Mary Ellen Dunn, Marc Valenti (DPW), and Judy Crocker met for a second time on Aug10 to continue the discussion on how to improve streamlining of summer school infrastructure requests and to standardize the inventory school signage and pedestrian and bus safety measures at each school Using Lexington GIS maps of each school acquired from Judy Seppala (Technology), Marc Valenti helped to delineate the boundaries for where DPW and Facilities responsibilities lie and each school was discussed Also, as of this date the SRTS list of requested summer work for Hastings, Clarke, Diamond, and Bowman submitted in June had not been addressed. The group next meets in October, date TBD. • The STS Committee will be presenting an update on school bus transportation at the Lexington Transportation Forum on Sept. 25. • Two handouts were distributed and briefly commented upon The first was a Granlund political cartoon from the Globe Sept 5 edition entitles "Back to School Refresher Course for Drivers "The second from the same date and source included two Letters to the Editor under the subtitle "College Students Move In." These included, "Easing the logistics makes a difference"and 'Well- run day is a model of efficiency, not coddling"The ensuing discussion agreed that both articles illustrate how an organized approach to drop-off procedures of college coeds parallels what the Safety Greeter Kit had hoped to achieve in the Lexington schools Our next meeting will be October 4, 2012 at 9am in the lower Conference Room at Central Administration Respectively submitted, Judy Crocker