Howard school board tables decision on bus plan for next year

Apr. 12—By Thomas Goodwin Smith — thsmith@baltsun.com

PUBLISHED:April 12, 2024 at 5:14 p.m.| UPDATED:April 14, 2024 at 5:59 p.m.

The Howard County Board of Education has deferred a decision on school start times and a transportation plan for next school year.

The board attempted to make a decision during a meeting Thursday night, but ultimately chose to table the vote until April 25.

A motion to table passed by a 5-2-1 vote, with at-large board members Jacky McCoy and Linfeng Chen opposed. Board Chair Jennifer Mallo and Vice Chair Yun Lu joined board members Robyn Scates, Jolene Mosley and Antonia Watts in supporting the motion. The school board's student representative, Lamia Ayaz, abstained.

Acting Superintendent Bill Barnes had recommended that the board support a transportation plan that would keep current school start times next school year.

High schools start at 7:50 a.m., and the proposal aimed for no school to start before 8 a.m. in the 2025-2026 school year. The board previously directed staff to implement a 2024-2025 transportation plan in which no school could start before 8 a.m., citing the benefit of more sleep for high schoolers.

"With the information and knowledge I currently have at my disposal, I cannot responsibly support an adjustment to school start times that fulfills the board direction of both not starting before 8 a.m. while also reducing a total transportation window across all tiers," Barnes said. "Doing so now would very likely put our schools system in a position to experience the same challenges and a very similar crisis that we experienced at the start of this school year."

Howard implemented new school start times in September in an attempt to remedy bus delays affecting thousands of students. High schools now begin 10 minutes earlier, at 7:50 a.m. Tier 2 middle schools also start 10 minutes earlier, at 8:30 a.m. Tier 2 elementary schools begin five minutes earlier, at 8:35 a.m.; and Tier 3 schools begin 10 minutes later, at 9:25 a.m.

Chief Administrative Officer Jahantab Siddiqui, who has served as the system's head of student transportation since January, also presented the option of shifting the current schedule by 10 minutes for next year, which would achieve the board's goal of no school starting before 8 a.m. He said that timetable is not recommended because it would further disrupt families now accustomed to the current schedule. The 10-minute shift would be particularly detrimental to elementary school communities with a 9:35 a.m. start time, he added.

The recommended course of action would also give staff the ability to shift which schools fall under which transportation tiers, but not the ability to implement start times outside the three established tiers. Siddiqui said this would allow the system to optimize routing efficiencies. High schools would not be moved across tiers, so as not to disrupt after-school activities and athletics.

Although the Thursday evening meeting's agenda listed the transportation update as a report, which would require the board to take no action, Siddiqui asked board members to vote to adopt a plan Thursday.

"A decision today on the direction for the 2025-2026 school year will give us adequate time to model routes and then return to the board with any additional operational or financial considerations before those impact the start of that school year," Siddiqui said.

Mosley said she would need to see more options before voting and requested that staff explore a scenario that swaps Tier 1 and Tier 2 transportation times, which could eliminate multiple groups in what is labeled Tier 2.

"I do not agree with this," Mosley said, "because I think the whole conversation that we've had is that the board's intent has always been start school times at 8 a.m. That didn't happen and that's still the intent. That never changed, so I really don't think that the board should have to vote on something like this."

Lu said starting schools no earlier than 8 a.m. would be beneficial to high schoolers, but not worth the disruption caused to elementary students or possible budgetary ramifications.

"At this time I agree with the deferring implementation," Lu said. "At least for the next school year, let's keep it as is, so it's more stable and so there won't be as much disruption. Also, we don't really know the financial impact."

Watts said schools starting no earlier than 8 a.m. should have been implemented as the board directed, which sets a concerning precedent of staff ignoring the board's decisions.

"I'm not going to vote against what we already decided twice now, through any kind of action," Watts said. "I'm not taking an action. I don't really think that's an appropriate thing to ask of us. We already took the action."

McCoy agreed with the staff-recommended course of action. Implementing an 8 a.m. start time makes no sense without adequate time to understand the ramifications, McCoy said, and adjusting school times is not her priority unless it raises undue budgetary or logistical challenges.

"I fully support delaying the start time initiative for one year," McCoy said, "until we can really gather the sufficient amount of information and data in order to do a more effective job, and to avoid the fiasco that we had this year."

Ayaz said keeping start times as they are would improve consistency for families and restore students' confidence in the school system.

"I'm very hesitant for us to possibly shift it by 10 minutes," Ayaz said. "It seems like a small change but going back and forth — in what might be perceived as waffling by students — might be something that wouldn't be taken super well. So, I would suggest that we stick to what we have for right now."

Chen moved "that the board approves continuing the current school start times for the 2024-2025 school year and make adjustments to move some schools between tiers to achieve routing efficiencies."

The motion was seconded by Lu, but was not voted on. The board instead carried a motion to table the decision.

Determining school schedules should be a collaboration between the superintendent and the board, Barnes said.

"I would only exercise that authority in that way if I thought we were heading towards a repeat of the crisis we experienced last fall," Barnes said. "It is with no great pleasure that I come to this board with a recommendation that is at odds with our shared goal, with respect to school start times."

Share this:

— Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)

— Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)

—