Cliff Buchan
News Editor

Will they or wonít they? When it comes to talk of the privatization of the ISD 831 bus system, thatís been the question on the minds of Forest Lake school bus drivers this spring.

Now the drivers have their answer. There will be no outsourcing of the district-owned transportation fleet that travels more than a million miles each year.

The decision came during the boardís regular meeting last Thursday and was greeted with cheers and applause from drivers and friends who packed the board room for three hours awaiting the board ruling.

It wasnít unanimous and not all board members voted on the motion to not privatize the bus system, but the decision last week was a signal most on the board desire to move on and deal with plans for a November operating levy proposal to voters in the district.

The move to halt talk of outsourcing passed on a 4-1-2 vote with member Keith Dunham casting the lone no vote. First-year board members Eric Langness and David Gay abstained. President Bill Bresin and members Julie Corcoran, Joe Grafft and Rob Rapheal were in support.

Dunham, for one, said he felt the school district needed to move forward with a request for proposals on a private carrier contract to show voters in the district once and for all that outsourcing would or would not work here. Dunham said he was not recommending outsourcing, but wanted facts to show potential levy supporters that the school district was not stuck in a rut of doing ìbusiness as usual.î

Watson speaks

The boardís decision was made easier thanks to an update from Tom Watson, a transportation consultant from the Watson Consulting Group who provided an update on his 2005 study here.

While fuel costs have significantly increased during the past year most variables remain unchanged in comparing systems and the impact on Forest Lake, he said.

Based on his review of districts of comparable size, Watson said the district would be well served to not change. In his view, the district was receiving good value for its investment.

When asked by the board if the value for the district investment in transportation was good, Watson said, ìAbsolutely. This would be an easy decision if I was on your board.î

If price is an objective, Watson recommended never moving to a contract. That point, he said, was based on the fact private contractors are holding firm on charges.

The recommendation was enough to push the board to a motion that would stipulate no privatization. The motion came from Rapheal who has been a proponent of maintaining the district-owned bus system.

Board talk

Some of the talk from the board table last week connected the bus system with the voters and how they may vote in a fall referendum.

Dunham was clear in his belief that outsourcing deserved a hard look to show voters the pros and cons of using a private contract.

Member Grafft did not accept a point from Langness that the board needs to communicate facts to voters on the transportation system. Without such dialogue, another levy vote could be in danger of failing, Langness said.

ìIím tired of talking about it, too,î Grafft said.

He added that the board needs to be proactive and mobilize parents and the public to get out and vote for a levy. Although Langness ran last fall in opposition to the 2005 levy proposal, Grafft said a positive approach could overcome negative feelings.

ìYour 60 percent is going to be 30 percent,î Grafft said to Langness.

Julie Corcoran, another first-year board member, said she favored keeping the current system that she described as a well-run system that employed good people who were often friends and neighbors. She did not buy the point the bus fleet issue would be a levy problem.

ìWe have to move on,î she said.

7 buses OKíd

The board also took action in a pair of votes on May 4 to buy seven new 71-passenger buses and trade in nine vehicles. The total cost is $508.584.91 which includes a $14.400 allowance for the nine units being traded.

The board held the bid award in April to allow more time for the transportation study review.

Corcoran initially pressed for the purchase of just three new units in light of budget considerations. In light of new federal emissions standards that will add costs to each unit in 2007, the board approved a second motion to buy the additional four new units.

Langness abstained on both votes to buy buses, but Gay, who pushed for the full seven because of the cost factor in 2007, joined the other members in supporting the purchase.

The second vote to buy four units passed 6-0-1 but the first motion for three buses passed on a 4-2-1 vote as Dunham and Gay opposed the move.

The decision came over board concerns that just one bid had been received from Hoglund Bus Co. ìIím terribly concerned about having one bid,î Gay said.

Gay and Langness both questioned the districtís bid specs saying they may be too restrictive.

School officials said the bid specs today are greatly reduced from prior years and call out a product that is consistent with the fleet system operation and designed to meet the needs within the Forest Lake school district.

Langness said later he abstained from the votes on the bus bid based on lack of information and only one bid received by the district. Regarding the vote on the district not privatizing the bus fleet, Langness said he abstained because the Rapheal motion was ìpointlessî in his opinion.

Top of Page

Forest Lake Times
P.O. Box 218
880 SW 15 St.
Forest Lake, MN 55025
651-464-4601
Fax 651-464-4605