challenges? the bus is necessary. that is a necessary component to their everyday school activity. how are we discerning for families? when i really look at it, it is something i have always had, and i believe it is necessary, but when i start looking at the criteria, i have come to discern it is not necessary. i fall into that. this is not necessary for me, and i am going to have to figure out another way to get my kid to school. it is not necessary for my child's existence. have we figured out those things that can help families self assess whether they fall into the necessary busing versus unnecessary busing? i desire it reverses i need it -- versus i need it?

>> we are developing the framework for that. the policy framework the board is going to vote on tomorrow talks about the goals and objectives for transportation infrastructure. we are using that as the from work and looking at the data and the information to get a better sense of what the best way to design future transportation infrastructure is that will support this. i think having transparency around that is going to be really important for families. but commissioner norton was saying about making sure -- when we know what the future is going to look like what it is and why it is, so we are not just saying to a family or a school that they are not getting transformation -- transportation, but provide a full context for why the changes are being made. the families want to request something, we should use a

transparent framework and do it consistently. i think that that is the approach we are going to take, to be as transparent as possible, to consistently apply the goals of the policy to any decisions. commissioner yee: could i just add a little bit along the lines of this discussion? one of the things that we have talked a lot about in staff working group is this point about how to get a better understanding of the impact on the families, especially in the short term for next year, in case it wasn't crystal clear what these efforts would look like on page 11. the direct mail to the families

that are currently served by the existing routes -- that is a mechanism for us to try to ascertain. i do not know if that is going to be through a scientific self assessment. chairperson wynns: we do not know who they are. commissioner yee: we are gathering information through -- chairperson wynns: schools. we are trying to get every family who uses the school bus to tell the school. >> 49 of the schools and at 2800 of the 3000 riders. we're almost there. chairperson wynns: you are pretty sure they've got everybody? >> we understand there are teachers who ride the bus. we gave each teacher a classless with the column and they could check off whether the student wrote in the morning, afternoon, or both. commissioner yee: once we do

make the determination of the routes for 2011-12, and keep in mind that what we are planning for the time being is a net reduction of six of the existing 44 buses -- that could be a reduction of six buses. it could be a reduction upper -- of more than that in order to allow some movement towards the final version or the future vision. but that is going to be very detailed information. frankly, dennis, frank, and the teams of the transportation department are going to be using this data from existing families to really see what the impact will be and how to minimize the impact. at the same time, we are trying to make initial steps toward that future vision. once we have that, that is where

discussions with the families in schools comes into play. i think that is what commissioner norton was suggesting, that we do work very specifically with the families at the school communities that may be impacted. we do not know exactly what that is going to look like at this point, but the intention is to take those kind of steps. it is not just getting a letter or coming to the meetings of the school board. it is doing pro-active out which to inform the communities to include it in the discussions, information about the alternatives or whether it involves ways to get to the light or the school, or to enroll in other feasible settings. all of that, i think, will be

clearer once we have recommendations on specific routes to keep them to phase out for next year. all of the process steps that we just mentioned, i think, are going to take place so that we can avoid this feeling of a unilateral surprise to the families that may be impacted. commissioner mendoza: i am glad we are -- i think this is going to be really important. part of the reason why we set out the student assignment policy the way we did was with the idea we were going to be getting rid of transportation. i am comfortable with that. i think families have historically been able to choose schools because transportation was available. this will also kind of change the behavior of how families choose schools. we are also hoping there will

stay within their communities or go to schools that -- why do with our high schools. carpooling and find ways to do that. i think we should also see if we can work with mta to do perhaps some individual bus routes, like informational pieces that we can do for families that get from point a to point b. perhaps we can work with them in some capacity to provide that information as these letters are going out. not all of us can figure out how to get on to muni.com. i know all the high schoolers and middle schoolers can tell me how to get anywhere, but you know. so there are ways we can try to help minimize the stress around that. i was also wondering -- this is something you and i have had

multiple conversations about over the years. we will have regular transportation for our a p students. is there a way that any of our general education on the same route can ride the buses? that way we do not have three kids on a bus because they are iep students and not general at students. i do not know if there is a way we can fit certain criteria, a certain age. but we have had discussions the around siblings that cannot ride the buses when they have a sibling with an iep even though they go to the same school and are related. that is something we should also consider in terms of accommodating families are kids if there is enough capacity on the bus with our special ed students for students with iep. chairperson wynns: i have a couple questions.

the first one is i am hoping that as this information goes out and we have these discussions with the community that i know that we are not -- some of this is something that will happen later. i just think we should make people aware of this. this is the implementation of a new student assignment system. there is not any -- in other words, it is not just in january that we are going to know everything we know. we are going to know a lot more after march, when we know which schools have how many kids. we are making a lot of presumptions about what is going to happen to these schools, what kind of requests we are born to get, helpful that are going to be. we do not know them yet. if we told parents it is after those times that we will know more -- i do not think we are able to guarantee them a spot in another school that may be more

accessible to them, nor will we be able to guarantee them a spot in a different after-school program. but we will make a commitment to sit down with them to try to work it out. that -- my experience is that in those years when we have had, frankly, new venues that made modifications to the student assignment system, that we had a lot of dissatisfaction and anxiety because it was the first time when the results came out, or in the interim period when we sat down with people and said, "what are your problems? this is where we might have space. this is where we have transportation. here is what the after-school program is." there has been a lot less anxiety. i think there is enough knowledge in the parent community that we actually can accomplish a lot for individuals just by making a commitment to

counseling are making people available, or that we are going to have a time when we will look at that, so they do not think this is all the help that are going to get to us. the other thing we have not mentioned here, but we have talked about recently, it is the realignments of the after-school programs. i am hoping that we at least have that in mind, that we also will say that. that we are working with the city on a major realignment of after-school programs. that we will -- that is one of the -- information we might get from people about how many of them might have trouble accessing the after-school programs they are in. it might give us the ability to get a list of where we need more capacity and initiate new after- school programs or expand some

of them. we need to do that, and we need to tell people that we are clear on that and we will look at that when we see with the needs are. in both of these areas, i hope we will be able to say to people we are not just making an announcement that we are moving your transportation and now you are on your own, but that we are aware of these various developments and plan to provide them with some service and support. these are the kinds of opportunities that we might have to make, some changes that might be helpful to them. i do not know if any of the comments or questions we made you want to answer, or have any responses to. commissioner fewer: how much money are we saving doing this? >> overall, i think the document -- the q&a type

document, if you look at the second page of that, indicates the long term budget goal. this is based on how much we currently spend on general ed transportation and what of that could be redirected, or savings could be redirected to other things. if you see the little table, it is a total of about $6 million in the current year and $2.20 million is dedicated for transportation. in other words, if we do not spend it on transportation, we do not get it. that is the baseline of funding that we would accomplish -- that we would contemplate. in any case, in the future, that is what we tend to spend on transportation. we intend to take $1.40 million that could be redirected. title 1 has a limitation.

under current law, under "no child left behind," if we do not spend that on transportation we would need to spend it on private after-school tutoring. that is not free and clear to be repurchased for general purposes. excuse me? >> i was joking when i said i would rather spend it on transportation. chairperson wynns: the law could change. >> the bullet points right below that indicate what the percentages are of these resources that could be saved or redirected in those two sources. in the short term, if we had a net reduction of six buses next year, that would save about $600,000. it is about $100,000 per general

ed bus. chairperson wynns: remember, buses, not routes. the buses have two or three routes. commissioner fewer: next year, we hope to save 600,000? that is what you're telling me? >> i will remind the committee that we had a reduction of six buses in the current year, compared to last year. that was by eliminating all general at high school routes. that was what was in the budget deficit action plan that the board approved last year. that was a reduction over two years of $1.20 million. a further reduction was not even scored in that plan. this would generate an additional -- chairperson wynns: actual savings for next year. commissioner fewer: did we give counseling to the high school students that normally get transportation? i know those buses were fall.

did we give any counseling to them? >> what is very interesting -- and please jump in if i get this wrong -- but what was very interesting is that we did not undertake the kind of activities that we are contemplating with the school community meetings and individualized counseling, and talking about alternatives. and yet i think the word had gotten out enough about these impending reductions that when the letters were mailed there was very little -- we did not hear much about the impact of these reductions from these families. we were a little bit surprised. commissioner fewer: i was too. i am on a couple of listservs, but nothing. having brought parents over to epc < they do this kind of

counseling already -- over to epc, they do this kind of counseling already. they say it the shortest route to each school. the are already doing some of that, and i think pretty extensively. this would be sort of an extension, i guess, of this, working particularly with schools. i guess the counseling also would change. we must notify parents as they are signing up for schools there will no longer be transportation to the schools and this is the best bus route. thanks. chairperson wynns: i was hoping you would answer a few of these questions. i would get to that later. i particularly am interested in the question of the special ed us, whether we can figure out a way for kids without ieps to

ride those routes. one other question -- when you look at the -- i understand this is a little bit misleading. excuse me. the pan map that shows people who ride in the morning only -- 11% is kind of shocking. that does not count those who run morning and afternoon. still, i am not sure we have heard enough information about routes that are really underutilized in the morning. are we consider writing -- considering the idea of routes we only have in the morning that we do not have in the afternoon? i know that is a new way of planning, but i am wondering if that is a new way we can save money. >> commissioner, let us take the first -- the last comment first. annually, we go through to see what stops we can reduce. we look at what we can combine

and eliminate. that is what we are in the middle of right now, is going through accounts, getting back to schools to confirm there are no students. on the day we did a count, we make sure there were not absent or just not using the vehicle for that day. chairperson wynns: is that specific to the idea of having iraq in the afternoon and not in the morning? -- having a route in the afternoon and not in the morning? >> we take them independent of each other. it is a question. on the one hand, we have a bus picking up students in the morning, but in the afternoon no one was taking it back. we took the stock up. later on, we had parents who use the bus to go to school and not back from school. the reverse is true some places. as long as it was done without any cost, we have put the stops

back when feasible. if not, we just cannot. that has been the states. -- the stance. we are continually trying to refine the system down. we are not -- i want to see the money in the classroom, not on four wheels. that has been my position since i have been here. that is what i still try to do. that is where we would get. there will be hits. there will be severe cuts. we will try to mitigate those as much as possible. we will provide everybody with information as early as possible as to what those cuts are so they can take steps necessary to get their students to school. on the special ed question, the special ed buses to run around the city. most of them are not carrying 20 passengers, their capacity.

and a stop might exist in september and be gone in october. then the students will no longer be able to catch that bus, because they cannot keep that bus there and still do the special and -- ed. there was a situation where the bus was reaching capacity because there were four or five siblings with one kid going to a specific school, and we are picking up other students along the way, and we are coming up with capacity problems. taking the special needs child but not the siblings. they are not entitled to special ed buses.

the commissioner wrote -- commissioner: it is not a commitment for the year, and, second, because of transients eat oat -- because notof transiency, we do not have the obligation to provide it for the entire year. people are going to yell about it and be unhappy. we want to do as much as the possibly can within the severe financial constraints that we have. >> the other factor to remember is that the special needs -- commissioner: from a practical perspective, when my daughter was 3, the bus picked her up.

they would have to notify every general ed students to say, "if you would like a ride to the school, you can have it, but it might go away." the staff time alone in doing that would make it prohibitive. commissioner note: -- commissioner: if we cannot do it, but cannot do it. that we had somebody with four siblings that overcrowded that bus, that does not mean that we should say that we are not going to do it for anyone else, but to say that this bus is overcrowded, we cannot accommodate those children, that is different. commissioner: i want to be very open about this.

i think really considering the circumstances, there are some schools where this can be accommodated, and we can take this into consideration. it is not like we have to let the school know that you can cut chappaqua -- you can catch a bus going to rachel's house. we know the kids who are riding the buses. let's just think of how we can be a little more accommodating. that is all i am saying. chair wynns: ok, is there anyone in the public who would like to talk about this? we will talk about the community engagement plans, but let's take

public testimony on this item, if anybody wants to talk about transportation, the transportation policy. they are welcome to come to the microphone. is there anybody who wants to do that? no, ok, then we do not need to give the instruction. the next is an update from the parent advisory committee on the community engagement plans for the quality middle school pathways. go ahead. she was suggesting no board comment on this item. go ahead.

[laughter] >> good evening, commissioners. i am representing the parent advisory committee, and we will talk to the transportation issues tomorrow night at the board meeting. >> my name is vicky, and i will start by describing what we will cover in the report concerning community engagement in the k through 8, implementing the pathways, and then we will talk about our plans for community engagement in the process, and then, finally, address concerns and questions you might have. first, context. what we have been working on so far, what is our timeline, and why?

we have been meeting regularly with the district's staff, meeting with the middle school team, and our collective understanding is that the board will approve a system for student assignment to middle schools this coming may, and the implementation will be in place for the 2012-2013 enrollment, and the idea for the pathways is that they go beyond assignment, that they are just not about how elementary school students will go into middle school, but these pathways will also address program coherence, school climate, and overall school quality issues, which is something we have heard that parents have been asking for in a number of our other community engagement efforts. secondly, how are we proceeding? pac and others are working with staff to conduct community

engagement. in addition to staff, we are bringing in a community partners to help shape the discussion and facilitates conversations to bring in parents, students, educators, and community members into that process. for example, in early january, we are meeting with the dual immersion parents, for parents of children with disabilities, and others. overall, we have five goals for community engagement. the first is to inform the community about plans for creating k-8 pathways. the second is to shake the system through community discussions. the third is to increase middle school quality for all students. the fourth is for implementation of the new student assignment system, and finally is to build trust for the district and board of education through improved

communication. commissioner: can i ask a question? i am interested particularly in what you are meeting with eastern and advisory council. >> it has been the pac's of four years to strengthen these guys, so i met with them i think last week, to lead the know about the ideas for changing middle school assignment in the k-8 pathways, and we want to let them know what we are working on. them know what we are working on.