Four days of listening to lengthy and often meandering debate over minute details about school transportation equipment and operations would test the patience of a rivet worker at a bus factory.
But few of the more than 300 people who attended the 14th National Congress on School Transportation (formerly the National Conference on School Transportation) in mid-May would deny that the experience was not only critically important to the industry, but also enlightening and motivating.
As Max Christensen, state pupil transportation director in Iowa, put it: “Food — $100; hotel — $220; registration fee — $295; conference value — priceless!”
The conference, which is held every five years at Central Missouri State University in Warrensburg, Mo., brings together delegates from nearly every state to deliberate and approve national guidelines for vehicle specifications and operational procedures.
The final document created by this assemblage will be called the 2005 National School Transportation Specifications and Procedures. The 2000 document spanned more than 300 pages.
A few states adopt the document wholesale into their statutory requirements and administrative rules, but most take a more selective approach depending on their particular needs and concerns.
This year’s meeting was chaired by Dwight Carlson, a former state pupil transportation director in Iowa, who displayed remarkable humor, energy and patience throughout the four-day session.
Sponsoring organizations included the National Association of State Directors of Pupil Transportation Services (NASDPTS), National Association for Pupil Transportation (NAPT), National School Transportation Association (NSTA), School Transportation Section of the National Safety Council, the School Bus Manufacturers Technical Council and the Missouri Safety Center at Central Missouri State University.
Points of interest
The 2005 meeting featured several interesting developments:
The new section, “School Transportation Security and Emergency Preparedness,ݠbolsters the notion that the school bus community now has to add security to safety and efficiency as its chief objectives. The section addresses policy considerations, audit questions, training topics, equipment and a school bus-specific guide for emergency personnel on information such as emergency exit locations, battery type and location, and communication system type, location and operation.
“It’s important for the industry to take a leadership position to make further improvements to compartmentalization,” said Charlie Hood, Florida’s state pupil transportation director and chair of the congress’ steering committee, in supporting the resolution.
{+PAGEBREAK+} Fighting the tide
Under the legislative-style process of the meeting, state delegations each voted on the sections proposed by the various writing committees as well as any proposed amendments. This led to considerable debate throughout the four-day session. Several of the verdicts had to be decided by a state-by-state count (accomplished with the hoisting of small red and green flags) rather than a simple voice vote.
Here’s a summary of the more interesting or controversial issues:
Other vantage points
The following are some thoughts from delegates as well as “interested parties” who attended the conference as observers.
“There are always acts of courage and acts of self-interest. In many places, language was strengthened as numerous ‘mays’ and ‘shoulds’ became ‘shalls,’ reversing a major trend at the 2000 NCST. Some other moments where we stepped into the future were 24-inch seat height, noise-kill switches, lap-shoulder belts on small buses, maintaining more emergency exits than required by federal standard, windshield wiper design, communication systems and increased danger zone dimensions.”
Finlayson-Schueler also cited some perceived miscues: “We made some plain boo-boos, such as leaving a 2-inch shake test for wheelchairs when every other recommendation in the industry is for 1 inch. We also, without any discussion, stepped back from establishing best practice for hours of training.”
{+PAGEBREAK+}
“At this congress, you have the opportunity to feel the industry’s pulse, hearing the important issues for today and for the next five years. There was a sense of understanding among the delegates that the American public is not as interested in our present safety record as it is about how the industry prepares for improved crash protection and passenger management.”
“As a first-timer, I was most impressed with the level of expertise of the delegates and the commitment to produce the best document possible. I thought the process was very smooth and efficient.”
Connors was relieved that an alternate procedure to cross students, used only in California, that requires the driver to leave the bus and escort the children across the street, was defeated. “This had the potential to hurt a school district in the unfortunate event of a lawsuit involving a student injury or death related to crossing a street in front of a bus.”
“Transporting our special-needs children is a tremendous challenge. Each child has very specific needs and requirements. The section titled ‘Specially Equipped School Bus Specifications’ required a major clean-up. The committee did a phenomenal job of condensing, rewriting and organizing.”
“This was an incredible learning experience. I left the conference with a feeling of accomplishment and knowing that the work we do ‘matters.’ I would recommend this conference to anyone who has the opportunity to attend.”
Gervais did, however, have a suggestion for speeding things up. “The review process was very slow and cumbersome at times. Rather than go through the entire manual page by page, the emphasis should be on changes, deletions and new material only.”
“It was exciting being a part of it. I learned a lot during the process leading up to the conference, and then I learned a lot at the conference.”
Peters had one suggestion for improvement: “I think that electronic voting that places the results on the screens at the front of the room will be an essential improvement for the next conference.”
Post-meeting update
At press time, the writing committee chairs were still finalizing their sections, according to Hood, the steering committee chair. Once completed, the document will be available through the Missouri Safety Center at Central Missouri State University. For more information, visit www.14thncst.org.
For those of you who’ve never had the opportunity to attend the Warrensburg meeting, you’ve got another five years to make your plans. See you in 2010.
0 Comments
See all comments