Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Bussing could change to be fee for service. Families would sign up and pay for an entire semester. This would also solve the planning problem. They already start giving kids MCPS IDs in middle school, they could just give them a barcode sticker to scan if they purchase the pass. Families that couldn't afford it would get a reduced fee or free pass depending on income level.

This would cover the costs, provide better planning and free up millions spent on free transportation to be better spent on adding teachers and aides to the classroom.

Now this is a good idea.

And what about the kids who can't afford the fee? Are they just SOL?

c'mon people. It's called applying for "free bus ride" like they do with free and reduced lunch. Those who can't afford it can apply for a waiver.

Lots of school districts across the country go without school buses, including in areas where both parents work. Somehow they figured it out.

I had no school bus growing up in LAUSD.

However, the problem with MCPS is that too many ES kids live too far from their neighborhood school so it's not an easy walk. Maybe just provide buses to ES/MS kids?

*facepalm*

Of course you didn't have a school bus in LAUSD; it's an urban school district. There are no school buses in NYC either. They provide free or reduced Metrocards to students, though, so it still costs the city a ton of money to ensure the kids get to school.

Again, given the cost people have deduced on this thread ($650/kid), many more families will need a waiver than you're anticipating. The district might save some money, but we'll all end up with more traffic (both on the road and at the schools), more emissions, and I'm not sure the tradeoff is ultimately worth it.

? LAUSD is very large. I lived in the suburbs. It wasn't really urban. It was not that different from, say, Silver Spring. You are maybe thinking LA proper.

The income cut off should be the same for FARMs eligibility. The trade off is worth it if it means a K class can be reduced from 27 to 20.

+1. Reducing class sizes should be the priority.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

*facepalm*

Of course you didn't have a school bus in LAUSD; it's an urban school district. There are no school buses in NYC either. They provide free or reduced Metrocards to students, though, so it still costs the city a ton of money to ensure the kids get to school.

Again, given the cost people have deduced on this thread ($650/kid), many more families will need a waiver than you're anticipating. The district might save some money, but we'll all end up with more traffic (both on the road and at the schools), more emissions, and I'm not sure the tradeoff is ultimately worth it.

I'm certain it's not. Though I'm happy to entertain the possibility of tolls for parents who drive their kids to school when a bus is available or the kids live in walking/biking distance!

Be careful about trying to determine what biking distance is. I have a colleague who has been biking from Bethesda to McLean every day for 30 years (yes, including on route 123).

DP.. omg, seriously. No adult would think that's a reasonable bike ride, let alone for a kid.

MCPS has a determination for what area gets a bus. Areas that are walking distance that don't have to cross a major road don't get a bus service.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Bussing could change to be fee for service. Families would sign up and pay for an entire semester. This would also solve the planning problem. They already start giving kids MCPS IDs in middle school, they could just give them a barcode sticker to scan if they purchase the pass. Families that couldn't afford it would get a reduced fee or free pass depending on income level.

This would cover the costs, provide better planning and free up millions spent on free transportation to be better spent on adding teachers and aides to the classroom.

Now this is a good idea.

And what about the kids who can't afford the fee? Are they just SOL?

c'mon people. It's called applying for "free bus ride" like they do with free and reduced lunch. Those who can't afford it can apply for a waiver.

Lots of school districts across the country go without school buses, including in areas where both parents work. Somehow they figured it out.

I had no school bus growing up in LAUSD.

However, the problem with MCPS is that too many ES kids live too far from their neighborhood school so it's not an easy walk. Maybe just provide buses to ES/MS kids?

*facepalm*

Of course you didn't have a school bus in LAUSD; it's an urban school district. There are no school buses in NYC either. They provide free or reduced Metrocards to students, though, so it still costs the city a ton of money to ensure the kids get to school.

Again, given the cost people have deduced on this thread ($650/kid), many more families will need a waiver than you're anticipating. The district might save some money, but we'll all end up with more traffic (both on the road and at the schools), more emissions, and I'm not sure the tradeoff is ultimately worth it.

? LAUSD is very large. I lived in the suburbs. It wasn't really urban. It was not that different from, say, Silver Spring. You are maybe thinking LA proper.

The income cut off should be the same for FARMs eligibility. The trade off is worth it if it means a K class can be reduced from 27 to 20.

And NYC is large too. Have you been to Staten Island or parts of Queens? They feel pretty similar to Silver Spring as well. Very different from Manhattan.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

*facepalm*

Of course you didn't have a school bus in LAUSD; it's an urban school district. There are no school buses in NYC either. They provide free or reduced Metrocards to students, though, so it still costs the city a ton of money to ensure the kids get to school.

Again, given the cost people have deduced on this thread ($650/kid), many more families will need a waiver than you're anticipating. The district might save some money, but we'll all end up with more traffic (both on the road and at the schools), more emissions, and I'm not sure the tradeoff is ultimately worth it.

I'm certain it's not. Though I'm happy to entertain the possibility of tolls for parents who drive their kids to school when a bus is available or the kids live in walking/biking distance!

Be careful about trying to determine what biking distance is. I have a colleague who has been biking from Bethesda to McLean every day for 30 years (yes, including on route 123).

The MCPS walk zone for high schools is 2 miles, but 2 miles is really more of a biking distance than a walking distance.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Bussing could change to be fee for service. Families would sign up and pay for an entire semester. This would also solve the planning problem. They already start giving kids MCPS IDs in middle school, they could just give them a barcode sticker to scan if they purchase the pass. Families that couldn't afford it would get a reduced fee or free pass depending on income level.

This would cover the costs, provide better planning and free up millions spent on free transportation to be better spent on adding teachers and aides to the classroom.

Now this is a good idea.

And what about the kids who can't afford the fee? Are they just SOL?

c'mon people. It's called applying for "free bus ride" like they do with free and reduced lunch. Those who can't afford it can apply for a waiver.

Lots of school districts across the country go without school buses, including in areas where both parents work. Somehow they figured it out.

I had no school bus growing up in LAUSD.

However, the problem with MCPS is that too many ES kids live too far from their neighborhood school so it's not an easy walk. Maybe just provide buses to ES/MS kids?

*facepalm*

Of course you didn't have a school bus in LAUSD; it's an urban school district. There are no school buses in NYC either. They provide free or reduced Metrocards to students, though, so it still costs the city a ton of money to ensure the kids get to school.

Again, given the cost people have deduced on this thread ($650/kid), many more families will need a waiver than you're anticipating. The district might save some money, but we'll all end up with more traffic (both on the road and at the schools), more emissions, and I'm not sure the tradeoff is ultimately worth it.

? LAUSD is very large. I lived in the suburbs. It wasn't really urban. It was not that different from, say, Silver Spring. You are maybe thinking LA proper.

The income cut off should be the same for FARMs eligibility. The trade off is worth it if it means a K class can be reduced from 27 to 20.

Actually, it was less dense than Silver Spring.

Did you ever go to school in LAUSD? Exposure to that district? No..hm.. faceplam indeed.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

*facepalm*

Of course you didn't have a school bus in LAUSD; it's an urban school district. There are no school buses in NYC either. They provide free or reduced Metrocards to students, though, so it still costs the city a ton of money to ensure the kids get to school.

Again, given the cost people have deduced on this thread ($650/kid), many more families will need a waiver than you're anticipating. The district might save some money, but we'll all end up with more traffic (both on the road and at the schools), more emissions, and I'm not sure the tradeoff is ultimately worth it.

I'm certain it's not. Though I'm happy to entertain the possibility of tolls for parents who drive their kids to school when a bus is available or the kids live in walking/biking distance!

Be careful about trying to determine what biking distance is. I have a colleague who has been biking from Bethesda to McLean every day for 30 years (yes, including on route 123).

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Bussing could change to be fee for service. Families would sign up and pay for an entire semester. This would also solve the planning problem. They already start giving kids MCPS IDs in middle school, they could just give them a barcode sticker to scan if they purchase the pass. Families that couldn't afford it would get a reduced fee or free pass depending on income level.

This would cover the costs, provide better planning and free up millions spent on free transportation to be better spent on adding teachers and aides to the classroom.

Now this is a good idea.

And what about the kids who can't afford the fee? Are they just SOL?

c'mon people. It's called applying for "free bus ride" like they do with free and reduced lunch. Those who can't afford it can apply for a waiver.

Lots of school districts across the country go without school buses, including in areas where both parents work. Somehow they figured it out.

I had no school bus growing up in LAUSD.

However, the problem with MCPS is that too many ES kids live too far from their neighborhood school so it's not an easy walk. Maybe just provide buses to ES/MS kids?

*facepalm*

Of course you didn't have a school bus in LAUSD; it's an urban school district. There are no school buses in NYC either. They provide free or reduced Metrocards to students, though, so it still costs the city a ton of money to ensure the kids get to school.

Again, given the cost people have deduced on this thread ($650/kid), many more families will need a waiver than you're anticipating. The district might save some money, but we'll all end up with more traffic (both on the road and at the schools), more emissions, and I'm not sure the tradeoff is ultimately worth it.

? LAUSD is very large. I lived in the suburbs. It wasn't really urban. It was not that different from, say, Silver Spring. You are maybe thinking LA proper.

The income cut off should be the same for FARMs eligibility. The trade off is worth it if it means a K class can be reduced from 27 to 20.

Anonymous wrote:

*facepalm*

Of course you didn't have a school bus in LAUSD; it's an urban school district. There are no school buses in NYC either. They provide free or reduced Metrocards to students, though, so it still costs the city a ton of money to ensure the kids get to school.

Again, given the cost people have deduced on this thread ($650/kid), many more families will need a waiver than you're anticipating. The district might save some money, but we'll all end up with more traffic (both on the road and at the schools), more emissions, and I'm not sure the tradeoff is ultimately worth it.

I'm certain it's not. Though I'm happy to entertain the possibility of tolls for parents who drive their kids to school when a bus is available or the kids live in walking/biking distance!

Anonymous wrote:Bussing could change to be fee for service. Families would sign up and pay for an entire semester. This would also solve the planning problem. They already start giving kids MCPS IDs in middle school, they could just give them a barcode sticker to scan if they purchase the pass. Families that couldn't afford it would get a reduced fee or free pass depending on income level.

This would cover the costs, provide better planning and free up millions spent on free transportation to be better spent on adding teachers and aides to the classroom.

Go tell the legislature to change Maryland law.


Friday, Nov. 5, 2010
Bill would allow Montgomery school system to charge magnet students for transportation
Sen. Madaleno says it gives school system options; public hearing set for Dec. 6


Montgomery's public school students in magnet, immersion and other programs could be charged for bus rides to their schools if a bill proposed by the county's state legislators passes next year.

Sen. Richard S. Madaleno (D-Dist. 18) of Kensington, who drafted the bill, said he introduced it to give Montgomery County Public Schools a method to charge students in optional regular education programs for transportation provided by the school system.

Last year, as an option among broad budget cuts, the Board of Education considered the elimination of transportation for students attending magnet programs. It later backed off after an outcry from parents and students. The cuts would have saved the school system $4.9 million, or $1,026 for each of the 4,775 students in the programs, during a year in which the operating budget was cut from $2.2 billion in fiscal 2010 to $2.1 billion in fiscal 2011.

The proposed bill would repeal a Maryland law that prohibits Montgomery County from charging for transportation of students to certain programs, such as magnet, foreign language immersion and International Baccalaureate. Madaleno said Montgomery County is the only county in Maryland prohibited from charging a fee to students for transportation in these situations.

"Right now their hands are tied," he said.

The proposed bill does not specify how much the school system would be allowed to charge. Any charge would not apply to students taking the bus from their regular bus stops to their home schools and back.

Madaleno said school officials did not ask for the bill, but said he had conversations with school officials about the situation. Instead of simply considering whether to cut the bus service, the repeal of the prohibition would allow the bus service to be funded and continue, Madaleno said.

A public hearing before the Montgomery County delegation on the proposed bill will be held at 7 p.m. Dec. 6 at the Stella Werner Council Office Building at 100 Maryland Ave. in Rockville.

The chairman of the county delegation, Del. Brian Feldman (D-Dist. 15) of Potomac, said that after the Dec. 6 hearing, the county delegation's Land Use and Transportation subcommittee would likely consider the proposed bill. He declined to offer an opinion on the proposal.

"That's why we have hearings," he said.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What is this "working out the kinks" nonsense? It's not hard to figure out how many buses you need.

If you know where the kids live, it's not hard to figure out a route that will pick them up and allocate the correct number of buses to ensure everyone has a seat.

You all have really low expectations, which I get because it's MCPS, but this is kids' safety we're talking about. It's ridiculous to say "oh it's ok that they're standing or sitting in the aisle. Just give them time to figure it out!"

Yes, it's very easy to run a system that transports 120,000 students twice a day, when you're sitting somewhere typing on your phone on a keyboard.

It's not so easy when you're actually the one doing it, though.

Yes, Mr. Watkins, it is. You have been told repeatedly that MCPS can implement a system (like other jurisdictions) so that this overcrowding does not happen and that every student is assigned to a bus and a seat. But you refuse to do this.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Bussing could change to be fee for service. Families would sign up and pay for an entire semester. This would also solve the planning problem. They already start giving kids MCPS IDs in middle school, they could just give them a barcode sticker to scan if they purchase the pass. Families that couldn't afford it would get a reduced fee or free pass depending on income level.

This would cover the costs, provide better planning and free up millions spent on free transportation to be better spent on adding teachers and aides to the classroom.

Now this is a good idea.

And what about the kids who can't afford the fee? Are they just SOL?

c'mon people. It's called applying for "free bus ride" like they do with free and reduced lunch. Those who can't afford it can apply for a waiver.

Lots of school districts across the country go without school buses, including in areas where both parents work. Somehow they figured it out.

I had no school bus growing up in LAUSD.

However, the problem with MCPS is that too many ES kids live too far from their neighborhood school so it's not an easy walk. Maybe just provide buses to ES/MS kids?

*facepalm*

Of course you didn't have a school bus in LAUSD; it's an urban school district. There are no school buses in NYC either. They provide free or reduced Metrocards to students, though, so it still costs the city a ton of money to ensure the kids get to school.

Again, given the cost people have deduced on this thread ($650/kid), many more families will need a waiver than you're anticipating. The district might save some money, but we'll all end up with more traffic (both on the road and at the schools), more emissions, and I'm not sure the tradeoff is ultimately worth it.

Anonymous wrote:

You could also step into the fees. Remember the costs are already baked into the budget. You could recoup 50% the first year and then increase over the next several years. Also remember that economics drives behavior. If the bus is free there is more frequent casual riding. Kids that live close enough to bike and choose this option over paying or people who use the bus off and on would no longer be factored into the equation. You would have a more stable market of riders and be able to run the system more efficiently. It could even be potentially outsourced or privatized if MCPS can not run anything well.

Well, I guess it depends on what you think the purpose of school bus transportation is. If you think its purpose is to pay for itself, that would be a good way to go about it. On the other hand, if you think that its purpose is to get the kids to school, it wouldn't be.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Bussing could change to be fee for service. Families would sign up and pay for an entire semester. This would also solve the planning problem. They already start giving kids MCPS IDs in middle school, they could just give them a barcode sticker to scan if they purchase the pass. Families that couldn't afford it would get a reduced fee or free pass depending on income level.

This would cover the costs, provide better planning and free up millions spent on free transportation to be better spent on adding teachers and aides to the classroom.

Now this is a good idea.

And what about the kids who can't afford the fee? Are they just SOL?

c'mon people. It's called applying for "free bus ride" like they do with free and reduced lunch. Those who can't afford it can apply for a waiver.

Lots of school districts across the country go without school buses, including in areas where both parents work. Somehow they figured it out.

I had no school bus growing up in LAUSD.

However, the problem with MCPS is that too many ES kids live too far from their neighborhood school so it's not an easy walk. Maybe just provide buses to ES/MS kids?

The estimated cost of transportation in the fiscal year 2018 operating budget is $42,090,090. So let's say $42 million.

They say that they transport 103,000 students every day - I think that's from 2016-17, but I don't know if it would have gone up or down. So let's say 100,000.

Now, how much do you want to charge? To cover the whole cost, it would be $420 per kid per year. Are you ok with that?

But 35.1% of students last year qualified for free or reduced meals. Let's assume that kids who qualify for free or reduced meals are proportionately represented among the 100,000 kids who get bused. So it would only be 65,000 students who would pay. Now to cover the whole cost, it would be $646 per kid per year. Are you ok with that?

Also, what kind of enforcement mechanism are you thinking of? Who is going to collect and process the money? Who is going to check that a kid has been paid for? What if the kid hasn't been paid for and tries to get on the bus? What about kids in special education?

You could also step into the fees. Remember the costs are already baked into the budget. You could recoup 50% the first year and then increase over the next several years. Also remember that economics drives behavior. If the bus is free there is more frequent casual riding. Kids that live close enough to bike and choose this option over paying or people who use the bus off and on would no longer be factored into the equation. You would have a more stable market of riders and be able to run the system more efficiently. It could even be potentially outsourced or privatized if MCPS can not run anything well.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Again, it has been mentioned many times that the charges could be need based, meaning that a formula would be used to determine who has to pay. Just like school lunches. Why is that so wrong? The school lunch programs ensure that all children eat at school, regardless of their ability to pay, and a paid busing system could do the same.

Sure! And there should be tolls on the cars in which parents drive their children to school, too! Just like buses and school lunches. In fact, the tolls should be high, because we don't want to encourage more driving; we want to encourage parents (who can afford it) to pay the bus fees or to carpool. So if you think $650 per year is reasonable for a school bus, then the tolls need to be meaningfully higher than that. Let's say, $3.50 per vehicle per trip? $7 dollars per day, or around $1,260 per year? And your kid wouldn't be allowed into the school/into the car without proof of payment. How does that sound?

No fee to drive your kid to school, obviously, just like there’s no charge to pack their lunch.

What's obvious about it? Driving your kid to school has costs. Why shouldn't you pay them?

Well if you drive down I-270, you might pay some tolls, but society has decided that is reasonable under the circumstances. Just like the change from HOV to tolling on I-66 earlier this year that everyone was up in arms about, but which has worked very well.