A month out from the first day of school, homeless students in Akron Public Schools and those with disabilities still don’t know how they will be getting to and from school every day.
The usual drivers of those students also don’t know if they will still have an income this school year.
Monday’s school board meeting was supposed to bring that clarity to 1,200 of the city’s most vulnerable children and the people who interact with them daily. But after another contentious meeting, featuring an hour-plus discussion about potential legal issues and board procedure, the issue has yet to be resolved, leaving families and workers reeling a month before the school year.
“It doesn’t feel good, it really doesn’t,” van driver Jasmeen Wadud said following the meeting. “We were hoping from some clarity and some good resolutions today. But we keep hope alive.”
The board took action to allow the district to transport students in a variety of ways, passing two general resolutions that do not address specifically how kids will get to school.
Board members delayed action on a transportation contract — one they had already rejected a month ago — until a series of legal questions could be answered. The administration and board said a special meeting would likely be called in the coming days.
Board members, in particular Barbara Sykes, grew increasingly frustrated with the administration over the unresolved issue and the manner in which it came back before the board.
At one point, after Superintendent Michael Robinson asked the board members what direction they wanted him to go in terms of hiring a firm to handle transportation, Sykes replied: “What you are to do is to be the superintendent, the administrator of this establishment. That is what I would ask you to do. Because I’m going to do my legislative responsibility.”
Akron school district pursues plan to outsource van drivers
On June 24, the superintendent brought the board a contract from Templeton Transportation LLC to transport many of the city’s homeless students and students with disabilities, ending a 50-plus-year practice of using independent van drivers on individual contracts. The drivers also assist APS in covering the district’s legal responsibility to transport homeless students and students with disabilities to private, charter and other public schools.
Over the last year, van drivers have advocated for pay raises and changes in how APS handles its contracts. Among their chief concerns is the $2.9 million the district has paid two companies it hired last year — UTC Trans and KBT Transit — to fill the gaps when there weren’t enough independent contractors available. The two companies transport fewer students for more pay while the independent drivers earn less despite transporting more students.
Not long after those questions were raised, Robinson’s team came out with a plan to completely outsource all the van drivers, and put out a request for proposals (RFP), receiving more than a dozen bids.
The administration gave several explanations for why it was necessary to change the way things had been done, including too few independent van drivers, pressure from the state, the time it took APS staff to process all the payroll for every individual driver, and liability.
But board members raised questions then about whether the move was truly necessary, how the district’s liability risk would actually improve, and whether the new company would be able to hire enough drivers for all the students in time. They voted down the contract 5-2.
Robinson said he would confer with legal counsel over the questions the board had, and come back at another meeting with options.
But Monday night, when Robinson’s team brought back two options, one was the exact same contract with the same company the board had already rejected. The second option still involved using that company, but in tandem with independent contractors.
Akron school board member Barbara Sykes raises concerns about rejected contract
Sykes said the contract should not have been placed on the agenda because the board rejected it and never took a vote to reconsider its previous one, which would have to happen in order to even have a discussion about it again.
The second issue, she said, was a legal one: Was the administration violating the legal parameters of the RFP process by bringing back the same contract even after it had been rejected and then having ongoing conversations with that vendor?
If so, she said, the other vendors who had been passed over would have a legal case against the district.
“My advice would be, if we proceed with this, that these other vendors have every right to sue this school board,” Sykes said while standing. “And I will join them.”
Board member Job Essau Perry, who is a lawyer, also expressed concern for the possible legal issue.
“I want to make sure we’re not breaking the law, first of all, if we’re doing something illegal,” Perry said. “I mean, that’s kind of the first start, I guess.”
Robinson replied just audibly: “Well, OK, according to our attorney, we’re not. But OK.”
Board President Diana Autry said after the meeting a special meeting would likely be called ahead of the next board meeting, which is not scheduled until Aug. 12.
“The board has done the responsible thing, asking the tough questions,” Autry said. “Now the superintendent and his team have to go back, look at things, clarify some of these issues.”
Contact education reporter Jennifer Pignolet at jpignolet@thebeaconjournal.com, at 330-996-3216 or on Twitter @JenPignolet.
