Today’s fun fact: DASH, the name of Alexandria’s transit system, is an acronym for “Driving Alexandria Safely Home.”
There should be a sense of disappointment, and lost opportunity, over the demise of the proposed pilot program to transport a limited number of Alexandria City High School students on two midday DASH bus routes.
The City Council, School Board, senior staff members, and DASH personnel met on Sept. 29 to discuss the possible use of DASH to transport ACHS students, an idea that originated in the Council last January. The pilot program took significant time for the staff from the city, ACPS, and DASH to develop.
The meeting began with a surprise from School Board Chair Michelle Rief, Ph.D.:
While we appreciate the efforts to explore cost-saving strategies and alternative transportation options, we ultimately do not believe this approach is in the best interest of ACPS students, families or staff. In fact, we believe there’s a risk that it could lead to increased costs and diminished transportation services for all students.
My mother, a recognized authority on human interaction, often said, “People can take bad news. They cannot stand surprises.” Mom’s point, which applies here, is that people are more adept at dealing with negative developments they can see coming, rather than bad news that catches them unaware.
The obvious question at the Sept. 29 meeting was, “Why was this meeting convened to discuss a pilot program for DASH to transport ACHS students when the School Board clearly has no interest in it?”
After the meeting, Chair Rief wrote in an email to the Times:
The School Board did not take a formal vote on the DASH proposal. Instead, at our Sept. 11 work session, Board members raised significant concerns, which I later summarized in a written report to the Board on Sept. 24. That document reflected a clear consensus: to continue our current hybrid approach, which encourages but does not mandate DASH use for high school students.
The announcement of the Board’s work session-generated “clear consensus” created strong adverse reactions. Elected officials present used the word “dysfunction” to describe the Council-Board relationship, one Councilor walked out, and another said, “I’ve been here 12 years and this is a 12-year problem.”
What should we make of the Board’s rejection of the proposed DASH-ACPS pilot program? The following takeaways seem appropriate.
The DASH pilot program was an opportunity. Alexandria’s elected officials have been talking about sharing city and ACPS services and improving intra-government efficiencies for as long as anyone can remember. At this point, a chance to coordinate city and ACPS activities appears to be lost. In contrast, later in the same meeting ACPS and city staff members described how they coordinate closely on joint facilities planning.
The least appealing rationalization for the Board’s rejection of the pilot program may be, as I was told, “The DASH pilot program would not really have saved that much money.” A DASH-prepared presentation identified ACPS savings of $282,000 from 16 additional DASH daily trips in school year 2026-2027, and additional costs to DASH of $210,000, resulting in a “Minimum savings opportunity Phase 1” of $72,000.
This is not nothing, especially in a period of intense budget pressures on the city budget that are compounded by the prospect of significantly reduced federal support. And, if the pilot program succeeded, there would be opportunities for more savings in later years.
The absence of specifically articulated reasons for the Board’s “clear consensus” opposing the DASH pilot program may be the most puzzling aspect of this situation. Bus drivers were present in force at the Sept. 29 meeting, and Board members expressed concern about the impact of the pilot program on drivers who would have potentially reduced schedules. However, little more was said about the merits of the pilot program.
If you had asked me on Sept. 29 for the top five reasons why the Board rejected the DASH pilot proposal I could not describe them then; I also cannot describe them now.
With the benefit of hindsight, the reasons for the Board’s rejection of the DASH pilot proposal would have been clearer if the Board had debated and voted on it. Sometimes, there is no substitute for the introduction of a properly seconded motion in an elected body’s public meeting, open debate, and a recorded vote.
The writer is a former lawyer, member of the Alexandria School Board from 1997 to 2006, and English teacher from 2007 to 2021 at T.C. Williams High School, now Alexandria City High School. He can be reached at aboutalexandria@gmail.com and free subscriptions to his newsletter are available at https://aboutalexandria.substack.com.
Thanks for reading About Alexandria!
Subscribe for free to receive new posts.
.
Have to be careful with those acronyms. Seattle put in a special trolley 10 or 15 years ago, from downtown north to the area up to the edges of Lake Union, where young Amazon was starting to expand in (an area that is now overwhelmed by Amazon). The service was called "South Lake Union Transit."
One story going around was the bus drivers losing hours and then as you wrote "showing up in force" was reach to far the Board. In tight urbanized SD's across the county student use of public transit is fairly common. Suburban or rural of course not. It is strange the Board never articulated their reasons. Nice summary.