School districts hurting for revenue should look to their school bus fleets for relief.

It’s so blindingly simple: Allow advertising on the exterior of buses and generate thousands of dollars each year for the general fund. Increasingly, school boards are considering this measure to help alleviate their budget shortfalls.

And why not? Transit systems routinely place advertisements on the sides, backs and interior of their buses to deposit badly needed dollars into their coffers. Typically, they hire an outside agency to handle the solicitation of advertising and collect a percentage of the take. Why shouldn’t school districts tap this same source?

Fed up with fundraising
Columnist Gail Kerr of The Tennessean in Nashville is among the boosters of this commerce. In a March 30 editorial, she laments the purchase of fundraising items such as wrapping paper, candy bars and light bulbs, “all in the name of publicly educating the children of my friends and coworkers.”

The Tennessee legislature’s push to relax advertising restrictions on the sides and rears of school buses has made Kerr giddy. “What took them so long?” she writes. “Anything that brings more money to schools without another hit on our wallets is welcome.”

Kerr dismisses the notion that children will be harmed by bus advertising. She cites their constant exposure to Internet pop-up ads, TV commercials, billboards, radio ads, e-mail spam and instant messaging. “You think little Johnny and young Sally are going to feel exploited [by ads on school buses]?” she writes.

What about the argument that the ads could distract motorists and lead to an increase in crashes? Kerr doesn’t address this issue, but other bus advertising supporters point out that the ads are generally allowed only on the sides of the buses, which aren’t visible to vehicles approaching from the front or rear during the loading and unloading of passengers.

Let’s think this out
A fat wallet is great comfort during lean times. So it’s no surprise that school districts are exploring all options — including bus advertising — to bolster their funding. Here are three reasons why they should resist the temptation.

First, the issue of safety goes beyond the approach of other vehicles during the loading and unloading of students. Let’s face it, the ads are designed to distract motorists. If they’re not getting the attention of the traveling public, then what value do they have?

Assuming the ads are doing what they’re supposed to do, then motorists will be looking at them when they should be watching the road for potential dangers. We all know that a fraction of a second can make the difference between a crash and a near miss.

Second, school buses are painted yellow for a reason: to make them easily seen and identified. Placing placards, even small ones, on the exterior of buses obscures that distinctive color, making it more difficult for the general population, as well as emergency service providers, to identify them.

Finally, the school bus industry prides itself on a lot of things, safety foremost, but also as the transportation provider of our future leaders. Yes, as Ms. Kerr mentioned in her column, children already are bombarded with advertising messages. What additional harm would be caused by a few bus ads? Not much, maybe. But wouldn’t it be nice if school boards drew a line in the sand and said, “No, we’ll find other ways to raise revenue, our children and our buses are not for sale.”

Yes, they might have to forgo whatever revenue could be generated by the ads, but it’s a small price to pay to retain the highest level of transportation safety, to fully preserve our school bus yellow heritage and to refuse to expose our children and communities to even more advertising.

With Internet pop-up ads, TV commercials, billboards, radio ads, e-mail spam and instant messaging, haven’t we all had enough?