When does the data matter?

Dear Editor:

For nearly a year, I have worked to address after-school transportation for rural families in Perkins County.

This effort did not begin with complaints—it began with solutions.

Last summer, I contacted school districts across Nebraska, following Interstate 80 as far as Kearney. When transportation policies were not available on district websites, I called schools directly, spoke with administrators, compared models, and gathered real examples of what is—and is not—working in districts similar to ours.

In October, I presented a proposal to the board. I understood this would be a complex issue, which is why I suggested a modified, hybrid approach—one that maintains existing hub stops while offering limited after-school home drop-offs for families who need it most.

Since then, I have organized outreach, conducted surveys, attended meetings, and worked to ensure the information being presented was accurate and unbiased.

The results have been clear.

Parents are losing work hours. Families are driving thousands of extra miles each year. Daily life is being reshaped around a system that is no longer working for the people it is supposed to serve.

And yet, after months of work and multiple rounds of data collection, the response continues to be the same: more data.

The data has now shown—twice—that the system we are currently using is not working. Worse, many families didn’t even know these changes had been made until after the fact, during a pandemic, and without community input.

At this point, the problem is not a lack of information.

It is a lack of action.

We have been told that a shortage of drivers is a primary barrier. Yet during this process, three potential drivers were identified and brought forward, and nothing meaningful was done with that information. At the same time, positions are framed as “interest” instead of being actively filled.

That is not a shortage.

That is a failure to act.

Over the course of this process, committee meetings have stalled, expectations have shifted, and follow-through on publicly discussed next steps has been inconsistent at best. Meanwhile, families continue to absorb the cost—in time, money, and missed opportunities.

Solutions have been presented—reasonable, limited, and achievable solutions. Additional stops. Targeted routes. Pilot programs. None of these require overhauling the system.

They require a decision.

The question is no longer whether something can be done.

The question is why it hasn’t been.

Transportation is not optional for rural families. It is a basic service. Regardless of a parent’s occupation, transportation is still a lifeline. And in a district supported by rural taxpayers, access should not depend on how close you live to town.

It is also fair to ask: when individuals in decision-making roles are not enrolling their own children in the public elementary system, what does that say? And why are those decisions being made on behalf of families who rely on it every day?

As we approach the next school board election, the community needs to ask itself a hard question:

If families have clearly communicated a need, provided the data, and offered solutions—what exactly is preventing action?

Because continuing to ask for more information is not a process.

It is avoidance.

Sincerely,

Megan Apolius

Rural Perkins County Resident and 

Perkins County Schools Parent