On Monday, the Madison Central School Board exercised its first vote under a new law that gives local school districts a say in where neighboring school districts pick up open-enrolled students. Madison Central approved Chester's plan to pick up open-enrollers at the Classic Corner gas station on the southeast corner of town.
Board member Michelle Tucek voted against the plan, expressing concern that a busy highway intersection with lots of cars pulling in and out. The location is about as far from any residential development as one can be while remaining in city limits (well, I suppose James River Equipment would be worse). For those kids who have the gumption to walk the mile or more to Classic Corner, the area lacks sidewalks. But hey, Chester picked it, so I guess we can't complain.
But we can complain about the arrogant overstretch of school board power over other school's transportation decisions:
Roxanne Leighton of Madison spoke to the board members and asked that Rutland have permission to set up three bus stops in Madison so that students would not have as far to walk to and from their homes. Jay Niedert, school board president, said Madison officials had to consider the possibility that all three school districts could ask for three bus stops, causing an increased amount of bus traffic within Madison on school days [Chuck Clement, "Madison Approves Single Bus Stops for Commuting Students," Madison Daily Leader, 2011.06.13].
Here lies a major reason I don't like Senate Bill 77, the law passed this session that empowers school districts to meddle in other districts transportation decisions. What authority does the school district have over traffic issues? The city, county, and state have authority over streets and roads. I have authority over my driveway. If I want someone from Chester or Rutland (yes, a sponsor of this blog) to come pick my daughter up for school, I still can't figure out how we justify giving the Madison superintendent and school board veto power over an arrangement for that out-of-town bus to stop at my house.
And if the school really has an interest in and legal authority over traffic issues, what else can the school control? Can the school order that semis and delivery trucks stay off certain streets the hour before and the hour after school? Can the school order that high school students carpool, or better yet, ban student driving altogether and require every student walk or ride the bus? The school could certainly rip up its student parking lot and fill it with something useful (like oh, say, The Miller-Ireland Fine Arts Center), but under Niedert's and SB 77's rationale, could the school forbid students from driving and parking anywhere on Ninth Street, Prairie Avenue, or Division Avenue?
Senate Bill 77 is nothing but sour grapes for school districts who don't like losing kids to open enrollment. Madison should have no authority over Chester's or anyone else's buses.
So, is there a penalty for breaking this law? Sounds semi unconstitutional to me. How can you ban people from public streets? I would so oh ok Madison thanks for the advice one the one bust stop but the roads are free and out of your true authority if so take me to court.
There's no penalty in the bill text. I'd love to see some plucky school district ignore this law and dare another school district to try enforcing it. Or just send a van, pick kids up at their houses, and see if the school district even notices.
Hmm, I was wondering why the Winner School Board moved to prevent the Colome School buses from picking up and delivering children to a grocery parking lot on the west of Winner and the Pamida parking lot on the east of Winner.
This seems more than passing strange as a law.
It is weird, Doug. What is Winner going to do if the Colome bus does drop by Pamida, give the driver detention?
In this case, Rutland, Chester, OR, please just pick up the kids where it is most convenient in your decision making. This is one stupid law that has(ignore it) all over it.
This is one pathetic mess. With our previous practice of "door to door" busing, between the Ramona and Rutland buses we must have had 12-15+ stops in town. So our proposal for 3 regionally based points around town is a fair compromise. There will be less bus traffic in town even if all three schools decide to have three stops... yet we have this "spin" about trying to reduce traffic.
Bottom line is this folks.... do not discriminate against open enrolled students. If Madison students are afforded multiple in town bus stops then allow your open enrolled students to have a similar level of service. Do not "punish" your OE families by demanding that they can only leave town from one point. Be more considerate and respectful of their decision to leave and perhaps you might win them back some day. This is our attitude toward students/families that OE out of Rutland.
That's really what this bill is about, isn't it, Carl? Letting schools punish kids for darign to leave the district? Pretty childish.
And maybe I just don't drive enough, but neither I personally nor any Madisonite I talk to has ever expressed frustration at the massive traffic snarl caused by those swarming out-of-town school buses. Traffic around town is not only not within the school's authority, it's a fabricated problem.
Carl, what would happen if you ignored the law and just kept picking kids up at their doors, or at the three compromise stops? Does Chief Pulford arrest your bus driver? Does the state cut off your funding?
I'm quite sure the law is really unenforceable when you think about it but we are trying to "make nice" and work with this compromise that was hammered out in the legislature (some wanted to completely prevent busing between districts). True free-market competition will drive school improvement, program diversification and better "customer service" at all public schools. Why are others so afraid of this?
I see no reason to make nice over an unenforceable, arguably unconstitutional law. Run the blockade!
What I want people to know, and this is what I told the school board is....I was a crossing guard for the city of Madison for 5 years. I have seen how dangerous it is for these kids, the kids are walking to school, and the parents are heading to work, and even though they are parents, they are on there cell phones, looking in the mirror, yelling at there kids in the back seat, in one second a kid could dart in front of them.
Years ago my son saw a girl get ran over in that same spot where I was a crossing guard, at the time the girl got ran over there were no crossing guards.
The thought of anyone, especially a school board, saying they don't want to keep the kids safe is just WRONG, and I don't think it will happen, but I could be wrong too. I don't think they hate kids, they might be mad that the kids are going to another school, I just hope they don't take that out on them, they are OUR future.
If a kid got ran over going from one end of town to another, just think how they would feel (the School Board), I couldn't live with myself.
I have had kids graduate from Madison. My last child was send to another school for his well being, I thank god ever day for Rutland School, it changed how he thinks about himself.
That's an excellent point on safety, Roxanne. When Madison Central complains about the extra traffic caused by one van or bus from another school district, it ignores the extra traffic (foot and vehicular) caused by requiring all those kids to travel separately to one pick-up point. That point lends serious weight to the argument that the schools supporting this law are thinking more about throwing up a barrier to open enrollment than about actual safety or traffic management.
Again, the OE students should be picked up were it is most safe and convenient. Ignore this stupid and silly law-do what is right and necessary.