Exploring DASH for High School Transportation: What the Board Discussed on Sept. 11
- Kelly Carmichael Booz
- Sep 22
- 10 min read
Updated: Sep 25
September 22, 2025
By: Kelly Carmichael Booz (District B) and Alexander Crider Scioscia (District B)
Note to Readers: As part of our effort to explain major topics before the School Board, similar to our redistricting updates, this post provides a summary of the September 11, 2025, School Board work session on DASH. The redistricting blogs received positive community feedback for making complex decisions easier to follow, and we aim to bring that same clarity to other issues.
This fall, the School Board will launch a new website where these updates will be posted, rather than on individual board members' websites. Until then, here is an update on the DASH discussion.
On September 11, the School Board held a work session to discuss the City Manager’s June 2025 proposal to transition general population high school students from yellow school buses to Alexandria’s public transit system, DASH. The City Manager’s proposal is broken down into three phases, with the first phase proposed to begin in August 2026. This was the first time the full Board reviewed the City Manager’s proposal in detail. As part of the proposal, ACPS staff were asked to complete a fiscal impact analysis ahead of the September 29th Joint City/Schools meeting. The Board reviewed the ACPS staff’s fiscal impact analysis on September 11 and discussed implications for students, families, and staff.
At the heart of the conversation is this question: ACPS and DASH already have a partnership to support families who may need an additional flexible transportation option for their student, but is making DASH a requirement, or a full replacement for ACPS general population high school students, the right move for our community?
This blog summarizes key points from the September 11 work session, including what we heard, what’s at stake, and what comes next.
How We Got Here
2023-2024: The previous School Board and City Council discussed enhancing shared services within the city, including opportunities with DASH. These conversations also touched on the aging ACPS bus facility as part of broader CIP facility planning needs.
January 2025: Vice Mayor Sarah Bagley and Council Member Abdel Elnoubi asked the City Council to explore shifting high school transportation to DASH.
February-April 2025: The City/Schools Subcommittee (with two School Board members and two Council members) convened three times to review data on ridership, safety, and system capacity.
June 2025: The City Manager released a recommendation for a phased plan, beginning in the 2026–27 school year.
July 2025: ACPS was asked by the City Manager to prepare a fiscal impact statement estimating savings and risks.
September 11, 2025: The ACPS school board convened a work session to review the DASH proposal. You can watch that meeting here.
September 29, 2025: A joint meeting of the City Council and School Board is scheduled to review the proposal.
What the Fiscal Analysis Showed
ACPS staff presented a financial model estimating potential cost savings if DASH replaced yellow buses for general population high school students:
Phase 1 (SY26–27): Up to $282,000 in savings if about 30% of general population riders within a quarter-mile walking distance from a DASH stop used DASH.
Phase 2 (SY27–28): About $564,000 in savings if 60% of general population riders within a quarter-mile of a DASH stop used DASH.
Phase 3 (longer term): About $939,000 if DASH replaced all high school general population routes.
These numbers come with an important caveat: they assume “all else equal.” In other words, the model only looks at what ACPS might save if fewer high school bus runs are scheduled, while assuming nothing else in the system changes. It also does not take into account any increased costs for DASH and whether or not there would be savings to the city, or if this change would be cost-neutral or an increased cost to the city.
The following sections take a closer look at the possible impacts for students, families, staff, and operations.
Why Consider DASH? The Potential Benefits
In considering the DASH option, a number of potential benefits were discussed:
Financial: Reducing yellow buses and consolidating bus use with DASH could show some savings to the city.
Efficiency: High school transportation is not mandated under state law. Transitioning some routes to DASH could reduce redundancy and save the city money.
Environmental goals: Potentially, there could be fewer buses on the road, and DASH already provides fare-free rides, aligning with the City’s climate goals.
Student independence: Some see value in teaching teens to use public transit safely, building skills they can use beyond high school.
Capacity alignment: If DASH absorbs some high school riders, ACPS buses could focus more on elementary, middle, and specialized transportation.
Where There Was Agreement
Across the discussion, Board members agreed on a few key principles:
DASH is a good, fare-free system that many students already use voluntarily.
The question is not whether students can use DASH, but whether they should be required to do so.
Any change should start small, with pilots and phased evaluation, rather than a broad mandate.
The ultimate goal should be resource reallocation, ensuring that dollars support students and instruction first.
What Concerns Were Raised?
1. Student Safety and Equity
The Board emphasized that any transition to public transit must account for both physical safety and equitable treatment of students.
Supervision and relationships: ACPS buses are required to have a number of safety features per state code. Safety features include having monitors for special needs buses, stop arms to warn drivers to stop as children board and exit the bus, and drivers who are vetted through background checks and trained to work with children. Beyond their formal role, many drivers and monitors build strong, long-term relationships with students and families. They help build community—greeting children daily, noticing changes in behavior, and offering reassurance. Importantly, they often understand and anticipate the needs of students with non-visible disabilities, such as sensory sensitivities or anxiety. These students may not qualify for specialized transportation under their IEP or 504 requirements, yet they rely on the care and attentiveness of school-based drivers and monitors to travel safely.
During the meeting, Chair Michelle Rief read aloud remarks from an ACPS driver that captured this role well:
“When you look at us, you may see drivers and monitors, but that's not who we are. That's what we do. Who we are are parents, grandparents, ACPS graduates, post-retirees, caregivers, and students. People who choose to serve our kids even when it's hard. We set the tone for the students who ride with us every day. We know our kids — some of us have been here more than 20 years watching children grow from pre-kindergarten to graduation, even seeing their children come through the schools. Some of us are parents ourselves with children in ACPS right now. Our experience goes beyond budgets or efficiency. Every child is an individual to us, and we know you see them that way too.”
Phase 1 geography: The City Manager’s proposal begins with students living within a quarter mile of DASH Lines 31, which runs along King Street and through Old Town, and 36A/B, which runs through Arlandria, and along Glebe Road. While these routes already carry many students, they are also among DASH’s busiest, raising questions about capacity and whether students would consistently find space on buses at peak times.
Equity considerations: Board members asked how the “first 30%” of students would be identified and what criteria would guide that decision, emphasizing that any approach must be fair and transparent.
Legal obligations: ACPS would still be responsible for transporting students with IEPs, 504 plans, or McKinney-Vento protection for students experiencing homelessness, as well as students in the same neighborhoods who live beyond a quarter mile from a DASH stop. This layered responsibility could complicate operations if some general population high school students shift to DASH while others require specialized school-based transportation.
Accountability: If students are mandated to ride DASH, who is responsible for those students while on the DASH bus? The City or ACPS?
2. Savings for Whom?
Another key question is whether the proposal would generate true savings, or simply shift costs from ACPS to DASH.
Shifting vs. reducing costs: While ACPS’s fiscal analysis estimated potential savings of $282,000 to $939,000, those numbers do not account for what it would cost DASH to expand service. Additional buses, new drivers, or more frequent trips could offset ACPS’s savings at the City level.
Open question: Board members asked whether the plan would actually reduce costs across the City budget or simply shift them from ACPS to DASH. Without a fiscal impact analysis from the City, it remains unclear whether the community will see true savings.
ACPS staff stressed that the $282,000–$939,000 figures are best-case savings; the reality could look very different once staffing and operational ripple effects are factored in.
3. Risks to Drivers and Staff
Members raised concerns that reducing high school bus routes could destabilize the workforce that underpins ACPS’s entire transportation system.
Impact on hours and benefits: ACPS currently operates 52 high school routes, staffed by 52 drivers. Many work six- to eight-hour days that qualify them for benefits. If high school runs are removed, 34 drivers could fall below the six-hour threshold, resulting in the loss of benefits, while others may see reduced pay and hours.
Risk of attrition: With a national bus driver shortage, neighboring school systems, some offering higher starting pay and recruitment bonuses, are actively recruiting transportation staff. In this competitive environment, experienced ACPS drivers could be drawn to more stable opportunities. Losing staff would not only affect high school transportation but also ripple into elementary and middle school service, special education, McKinney-Vento routes, field trips, and after-school activities.
Ripple effects on support roles: Mechanics, monitors, and other transportation staff could also be affected if the fleet shrinks, creating longer repair times and potential reliability issues.
Financial implications: If staff attrition forces ACPS to rely more heavily on private vendors, costs could rise sharply. ACPS already spends millions each year on specialized transportation through private carriers ($2.6M in FY24 and $3.5M in FY25), and those costs have nearly doubled in recent years. Additional outsourcing could quickly erode or even outweigh projected savings.
4. Process and Timing
Board members spoke about the importance of process, timing, and community input in evaluating any transportation changes.
Collaboration: Board members emphasized the importance of City and School leaders co-developing any major changes to student transportation, with a shared process that brings both perspectives to the table from the start.
Timing: Launching in 2026–27 would overlap with the implementation of new school boundaries and bus routes from redistricting. While those changes directly affect elementary and middle school students rather than high school, they still require significant planning and staff capacity.
Engagement: Members underscored that robust community engagement should happen early, before decisions are made, so families, students, and staff can help shape the path forward.
The Bigger Question: What Problem Are We Trying to Solve?
The Board work session discussion revealed an underlying tension:
If the goal is cost savings, is $282,000–$939,000 enough, especially if offset by DASH’s increased costs?
If the goal is to fix a bus driver shortage, ACPS has already reduced vacancies significantly since this idea was proposed.
If the goal is to modernize the bus facility, Board members noted that DASH also relies on a centralized facility, so is the real issue capital planning relevant to the Witter-Wheeler property, rather than student transportation?
If the goal is to build student independence and transit access, Board members asked whether continuing the voluntary hybrid model, where students can choose DASH or ACPS buses, may be a better fit than a mandate.
Alternatives and Enhancements
While the City Manager’s proposal focused on shifting some high school transportation to DASH, the Board also discussed other strategies that could improve efficiency and reliability across the system.
Private Carriers and Specialized Transportation: ACPS currently spends millions each year ($2,627,600 in FY 2024 and $3,529,100 in FY 2025) on private carriers for students who require specialized transportation or who are experiencing homelessness, and those costs have doubled in recent years. Expanding the use of ACPS-owned minibuses and vans, rather than contracting out, could reduce long-term costs while maintaining in-house services.
Bell schedule adjustments: The independent TransPar study recommended considering a three-tier bell schedule to allow more efficient use of the bus fleet. While such a change would require careful consideration of instructional impacts and staffing, it remains a potential lever to increase efficiency without reducing transportation coverage.
Facility investment: The ACPS transportation center had the worst Facility Condition Index (FCI) score in 2022 for the division. Modernizing it would improve working conditions, shorten repair times, and lower maintenance costs. Some Board members noted that addressing long-term facility needs directly might be more effective than shifting services.
What’s Next
Sept. 29 Joint Meeting: The School Board and City Council will discuss the City Manager’s plan together.
Community Engagement: Families, students, and staff must have a strong voice in shaping next steps.
Ongoing Analysis: ACPS will continue evaluating the financial, safety, and operational impacts of the proposal.
Final Thoughts
The Board is committed to exploring shared services while prioritizing student safety, equity, and learning.
As one Board member put it, DASH is already a great option for many families. The question now is the same one we posed at the start: is making DASH a requirement, or a full replacement for ACPS high school buses, the right move for our community?
We will continue this dialogue with City Council and the community in the weeks ahead, with the shared goal of finding solutions that balance efficiency, equity, and student safety.
In the meantime, we welcome community feedback and invite you to share your thoughts with the Board here.
You can also listen to comments from the ACPS Student Representatives on their thoughts about DASH from the September 18, 2025, board meeting and read the Theogony op-ed from student representative member Darwin Salazar, titled “Op-Ed: Why DASH is NOT the Solution.”
At a Glance: Potential Benefits, Risks, and Questions
✅ Potential Benefits
Reduces duplication: Could remove 10–12 HS routes in Phase 1.
Phased rollout: Start small, test before scaling.
Climate and access: Fare-free, electric fleet supports climate goals.
Student independence: Builds transit skills teens can use long-term.
Capacity alignment: Frees ACPS buses for younger and specialized riders.
⚠️ Potential Risks
Uncertain savings: ACPS savings may be offset by DASH costs.
Driver impacts: Up to 52 drivers affected; 34 could lose benefits.
Safety and supervision: DASH lacks stop arms, monitors, and child-trained staff.
Equity considerations: How the “first 30%” is chosen raises fairness issues.
Operational readiness: Lines 31/36A/B are already crowded.
Process and timing: Must be co-developed and aligned with redistricting.
❓ Open Questions
Total cost: What is the combined ACPS + DASH financial picture, including City costs and capital investments?
Responsibility: Who holds responsibility for student safety and accountability while on DASH buses?
Selection: How will students be chosen for Phase 1, and what criteria will guide that decision?
Evaluation: What metrics will determine whether to expand into later phases?
Logistics: How will weather delays, after-school activities, and inter-campus travel be handled under a DASH model?
Comments