Why is getting straight answers on Busing so difficult?

Following the presentation of the transportation consultant at the last Berkeley Heights Board of Education meeting, Berkeley Heights Community Watch requested information from the district.

The request was for 1) all reports and analysis provided by the transportation company, 2) the rubric (mentioned multiple times during the meeting), and 3) the data from the transportation company supporting their statement that some courtesy busing areas were found to be non-hazardous, unnecessary and inconsistent.

In response to the request, the district gave us the same slide presentation that we had already seen from the BOE Meeting. As for the rubric, we received the following: “With respect to item 2, the District conducted a good-faith search and determined that it is not in possession of any responsive records.” And lastly… “With respect to item 3 please note that your request is invalid as it constitutes a request for information” followed by a lengthy explanation of what information is and why it’s not included in OPRA.

Seriously? The district is denying that there is a rubric: the rubric that was mentioned multiple times and that the transportation company representative said at least once they hoped our district would use to help determine which routes are hazardous?

The district has also made it somewhat difficult to find their recommendations for hazardous routes. In order to find this information, you need to go to the district website, navigate to the board of education section, click on the attachments, and find transportation policy 8600. Included in the language of that policy is the word “may”. This gives the district a convenient ‘out’ should they decide to deny any of the designations currently listed, so if your student currently qualifies for courtesy busing, know that “may” change at any time.

It does seem that the routes they’ve selected are inherently more fair and have some basis for hazardous designation, but without the rubric we don’t know what that is. For example, only certain sections of Emerson are included. My own assumption is that the area included is along the portion of Emerson that does not have a sidewalk. Horseshoe Road where there are houses is designated as hazardous. While Horseshoe Road does not have a sidewalk, there is a very wide shoulder. In addition, if the students living on Horseshoe cross the street, they can walk on non-hazardous Sutton. If the argument for inclusion of Horseshoe is that the students can’t cross the street? Wouldn’t that hold true for those on the south side of Emerson which isn’t included? They would have to cross Emerson (with its lack of visibility) to get to Old Farm Road.

It’s pretty much pointless to speculate, which is why seeing the rubric would be helpful. I would say that there isn’t a really huge argument as to what is designated as hazardous, but keep in mind that with the bus driver shortage, the more kids that are included in courtesy busing, the fewer kids that can be offered subscription busing.

Take a look at Policy 8600 and see what you think. And maybe ask the district to obtain the rubric from the transportation company.

Email Exchange Requesting Information On Transportation Presentation