Peggy Revell
But some
still skeptical
With families across the district concerned about the Rainy River District School Board’s busing policy’s ability to meet their needs, trustees approved revisions to it at last week’s meeting.
“I’d like to express my appreciation to everyone who had a hand in reviewing and revising the transportation policy that’s been approved at the meeting tonight,” noted board vice-chair Dianne McCormack.
The policy—which applies only to local public board students—follows months of the policy being reviewed after presentations to the board from concerned parents and a petition with more than 400 signatures was submitted back in December.
The policy change is a “win” at this point, said parent Tara Montague—at least for her own personal situation.
Montague presented her concerns over the transportation policy to trustees at December’s board meeting, explaining her son’s time is split between herself and his father’s home through a shared custody arrangement and schedule.
But this schedule wasn’t deemed “regular” enough for it to be accommodated for school busing.
“[The new policy] will help because now at least it addresses that there are different custodial arrangements, and not every child will have the same busing patterns as another child.
“So I think that is a big win,” Montague said.
Instead of defining what a regular and fixed pattern is, the new policy states that when it comes to a child’s schedule, “Parents are encouraged to work with the board to try and adjust schedules to establish a regular and manageable weekly schedule for busing.”
“Schedules are to be submitted to the transportation department well in advance of the start of the school year,” it adds.
“The transportation department will work with parents and principals well in advance to try and establish a regular manageable schedule to accommodate custodial arrangements while maintaining student safety.”
But Montague also is cautious over the changes, saying the policy’s language concerning the definition of a “regular” schedule is ambiguous—something she had asked to be clarified and defined.
Following her presentation to the board in December, the board made accommodations to have her son bused based on his custody schedule for this year, Montague noted, with this to be revisited next school year once the new transportation policy was set up.
“I’m feeling that [my son’s schedule] could still be interpreted that it’s not regular,” she said, noting that it depends how the policy is now implemented and interpreted now that it has been approved.
“All in all, I do feel like I was heard and I leave this process now saying, ‘Look, there was a tangible outcome,’” she added, despite the months it took for change to happen.
“This is good for parents because it did promote advocacy and working through a process.”
Changes to the policy now allow for an alternative address to be used for a child if notification is given at least three days in advance—changed from the old policy, which required at least two weeks’ notice.
As for the alternative address, it must be on the student’s present route, and must not result in a route extension or an additional stop.
Or if another bus is required for an alternative address, this may be provided if there is room on that other bus.
Three days’ notice is not required in the case of emergency, which the new policy defines as “death or severe illness with the student’s immediate family.”
As well, the policy on so-called courtesy busing has been updated—allowing for eligible secondary students to be bused for employment so long as at least the three days’ notice is given, it’s on existing route, and no additional stops or route extensions are required.
While the addition of the alternative addresses into the policy is an improvement, there still are issues that need to be changed, said Jackie McCormick, another parent who also made a presentation to the board in December.
“This is an ongoing fight for me,” she stressed. “I need to make sure that the needs of my kids are taken care of and I don’t think that they are with this current policy.
“It is something that is going to be ongoing.”
For McCormick, the biggest issue still remaining with the policy is when it comes to emergency situations.
“I think that they need to expand what the emergency is to include people other than the student’s immediate family, and perhaps add in caregiver somewhere there,” she noted.
For example, in her own situation, her child is picked up and dropped off at the baby-sitter’s.
“I am genuinely worried and concerned that something is going to happen where it’s an emergency for [the baby-sitter],” McCormick explained. “And because she is not his immediate family, that he is going to be left on the bus, riding around and around and around and has to be taken back to the school because I can’t call and say, ‘My baby-sitter’s had an emergency [and] my son needs off somewhere else,’ because it doesn’t fit the policy.”
As well, McCormick said she strongly believes emergency situations should include issues with vehicles or the weather.
“If whoever is supposed to be there to get a child off the bus [can’t be there], because they’re stranded because there’s a snowstorm or if something’s happened to their vehicle on their way home, those are emergencies.
“They need to be able to call and get their child off the bus somewhere else,” she stressed.
The move from the required two weeks’ notice for a change to the child’s schedule to three days is step forward, but still an issue, McCormack added, saying that changes should be able to be made even the day of if required.
McCormick also said she has an issue with how the board has yet to explain to her what was wrong with the old system she grew up with—where a note or call to the school or the bus driver the day of to make change for where a child could be dropped off that day.
“[That] worked wonderfully for many, many years,” she remarked. “They [the board] haven’t been able to give me any documentation about specific incidences where this was causing any trouble or it wasn’t safe.
“So that concerns me, as well.”
McCormack conceded at last Tuesday’s meeting that “regrettably there will still be situations arise that cannot be addressed by this policy.”
“But I assure you that everyone involved in effecting the changes from the trustees on down did the best they could to build in as much flexibility as possible,” she noted.
McCormack said she is “very pleased” with the transportation policy as it now stands, and thanked everyone involved with the process, including parents who brought their concerns forward over the last several months.
