Before I talk about the bussing debacle, I want to address today’s article in the paper, which focuses on the district’s Recovery Plan.  According to the article, “While some of the former school directors who approved the plan in 2019 believed they could amend it, the new directors learned last year that Finan had the power to implement the initiatives without a board vote.”

This is not what we were sold.  We, particularly PJ Duffy, fought to make sure the plan was amendable (here’s video of him addressing this) so long as finances improved.  And they have!

And think about this, if the Board can’t do anything, then why does a Board even exist?  We are in receivership in name only.  I understand that we’ve seen the current Board simply putting its rubber stamp on nearly everything, with the notable exception of Sean McAndrew, but it does not have to be that way.  I’ll give you an example:  When I served on the Board, Dr. Finan was against switching to a payroll tax.  The Board did its research, felt it to be a better option, and we voted in favor.  It was only after my iteration of the Board was gone that the switch was dropped.

Bussing

This issue is a debacle no matter what way you look at it.  The district expects kids as young as five to walk 1.5 miles to school because of the state’s reimbursement formula.  I’m sorry, but my sons, when they are five, will not be walking the mile to Tripp.  Luckily I have a family situation that’ll allow them to get there safely, but how many families do not?  The answer is that a lot of families won’t have the resources to get their kids to school safely.  I guarantee you’ll see declines in attendance, and another unforeseen consequence: another exodus to charters.

The clearer problem, though, is the danger presented by this.  I only recently learned about the “Freach and Keen” murders — the story is absolutely heartbreaking and horrifying.  And I also only recently learned that those terrible events helped lead to the creation of bussing in the Scranton School District in the first place.

Let’s break this down:

• First thing’s first: the Board didn’t know that this was going to happen, according to quite a few of them.  I don’t believe this would have gone out without the President knowing, but let’s say it did.  That means there’s somebody in Admin who is bypassing the Board and making major policy changes and community announcements without consent.  This is a problem that needs to be addressed.
• Next up, there was no risk assessment and/or feasibility study.
  • Right now, there are an alarming number of registered sex offenders along walking routes that children as young as FIVE would have to take ALONE if their families can’t get them to school.  This is morally abhorrent to me.  Any child along a route that is potentially dangerous should be given the opportunity to ride a bus safely.
  • Roads like Keyser Ave. do not have sidewalks on long stretches.  How many kids will have to walk down unsafe roads such as that?  Any child who would have to do this deserves the opportunity to ride a bus.
    • I’d like to add that one parent called the district about this and was told, “Then have your kid walk the back way.”  A safer way to avoid Keyser by going through neighborhoods would have added nearly another mile to the walk.
  • What is the actual dollar amount saved?  Money is the reason the district is justifying their behavior here, despite the district being awash with funds.  And don’t forget, there hasn’t been bussing this year so the district is banking that savings.  What is a kid’s safety worth to the SSD?  $10,000?
  • How much would it cost to actually expand routes to ensure maximum safety?

I’m saving an overlooked problem for last: how many more kids will just go to charters?  I would be in total fear watching my five-year-old son’s head disappearing over the horizon on his mile walk to school.  An easy solution would be switching to a charter or private school. And guess what the district has to do then?  PAY FOR BUSSING.

Does nobody think of consequence before they act?  The short term savings of aligning with state reimbursement guidelines does not come close to the long term cost of the safety and well-being of our kids AND the negative financial impact it’ll bring.

Director McAndrew said in the Times, “You can’t put a price on safety.”  I agree wholeheartedly.