Two weeks before the start of classes at his all-boys charter school near Pittsburgh, founder Darryl Canady received an email from his local public school district saying it wouldn鈥檛 provide traditional bus rides to his students this year.
Instead, Woodland Hills School District said it would supply each of the more than 140 students at LIFE Male STEAM Academy with Pittsburgh Regional Transit cards to get to and from class.
鈥淧lease note that this will be the only option offered by the school district this school year,鈥� the email read.
The notice took Canady by surprise. Nobody at the district had contacted him to talk about shifting his students to public transit, and the email provided no explanation for the decision.
鈥淓verybody鈥檚 concerned,鈥� Canady told Spotlight PA, referring to his students鈥� parents. 鈥淧eople don鈥檛 want to put their sons, especially 10 and 11 year olds, on a bus. And you may have to change multiple buses.鈥�
School districts in Pennsylvania are required by law to provide 鈥� 鈥� to most charter school students who live within their boundaries 鈥� a service public school districts and their advocates say is a growing burden due to rising costs and a shortage of bus drivers.
Woodland Hills鈥� decision is one of several instances in recent years where a Pennsylvania school district has at least tried to shift its primary means of transporting charter school students onto public transit, rather than traditional yellow school buses.
And this January, districts hoping to cut transportation costs notched a victory. In a long-awaited ruling, the state Supreme Court said school districts are indeed allowed to end bus service for charter students, so long as they provide alternative free transportation 鈥� like the bus passes Canady鈥檚 students are set to receive.
While the ruling offered clarity, the issue isn鈥檛 settled. Republican lawmakers in Harrisburg are backing measures that would effectively undo pieces of the ruling, and charter school advocates say if that doesn鈥檛 pan out, they may go back to court.
Students using public transit is nothing new in Pennsylvania. Multiple districts, especially those in urban areas, like the School District of Philadelphia, Pittsburgh Public Schools, and Allentown School District, already partner with local transit authorities to help get their traditional students to and from campus.
Also, both the federal departments of education and transportation list public transit as a 鈥� 鈥� method for transporting students.
But charter school advocates say the lack of infrastructure in some rural and suburban regions can limit the safety of students reaching and riding public transit, and lengthen commute times. They also argue that school districts can leverage the ruling to pressure parents to keep children in traditional classrooms rather than switch to charters.
Districts that transport students are eligible for state subsidies to offset costs and must follow strict state regulations that allow the use of 鈥渟chool conveyances, private conveyances, or electric railways, or other common carriers.鈥�
Pennsylvania reimburses roughly half of a district鈥檚 transportation costs on average through a subsidy program, according to the . The amount each receives is calculated based on factors like the number of pupils transported, the taxable property values within the district, and contract expenses. Not all transportation methods are equally expensive, however. The January court ruling noted that using public transit was expected to be much cheaper for the school in question 鈥� the state would have fully reimbursed public bus passes, but not school buses.
Woodland Hills isn鈥檛 the only district flexing its new court-approved ability to cut charter students off from its buses.
The Whitehall-Coplay School District administration also notified parents earlier this summer that it would issue Lehigh and Northampton Transportation Authority passes for all charter students 12 years and older. That decision, which the district said in a letter was to 鈥渙ptimize our resources鈥� and ensure sustainability, from impacted parents at at least one school board meeting.
One charter school advocate at that meeting was Susan Mauser, CEO of Lehigh Valley Academy Regional Charter School in Bethlehem. Mauser told Spotlight PA that under the routes proposed by LANTA, some of her secondary school students would need to walk up to 1.9 miles to reach their bus stop.
鈥淚鈥檓 a big believer in public transportation when it is on time and reliable and safe,鈥� Mauser said, noting reliability is less of a concern in cities. 鈥淎nd in this case, I just don鈥檛 know that we have the infrastructure in our area in order to be able to accommodate this.鈥�
Whitehall-Coplay School District said it would continue providing rides for Mauser鈥檚 students during the first two weeks of the school year so parents could have more time to understand the update, she said.
She told Spotlight PA that she is exploring legal options against the district, if it does not adequately address the charter parents鈥� concerns. The district did not return a request for comment.
Mackenzie Christ, communications director of the Pennsylvania School Boards Association, told Spotlight PA that although costs vary drastically by district, transportation is a 鈥渟ignificant responsibility and expense鈥� for schools.
鈥淪tudent transportation is a complex issue that involves considerations such as safety, accessibility, operational capacity and available resources,鈥� Christ said in an email. 鈥淪chool districts across Pennsylvania continue to face challenges related to transportation services, including ongoing shortages of qualified bus drivers.鈥�
Pennsylvania鈥檚 charter school enrollment has seen steady growth since the COVID-19 pandemic.
In total, there were more than 174,000 charter and cyber charter school students in Pennsylvania last school year, according to the . Compare that to in 2019.
Did lawmakers mean 鈥榠dentical鈥� transportation?
This year鈥檚 state Supreme Court ruling on charter student transportation dates to 2018, when Allegheny County鈥檚 Propel Schools and Betty Bell, a grandparent of a Propel student, sued Wilkinsburg School District over its decision to switch charter students from school buses to free bus passes.
At issue in the lawsuit was whether state law intended to guarantee the exact same transport methods for charter and public school students.
In a section describing when schools do and do not need to provide transportation, the law says that if public schools opt to provide it in certain situations, 鈥渢ransportation shall also be provided to charter schools under the same conditions.鈥�
A trial court ruled in favor of Wilkinsburg, and that decision was upheld by Commonwealth Court on appeal. (Though Commonwealth Court had sided with the plaintiffs in their complaint that the district should have sought approval from the Pennsylvania Department of Education before making changes to its transportation schedule, that decision was overturned by the state Supreme Court on appeal.)
In January, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court maintained that the phrase 鈥渦nder the same conditions鈥� was not applicable to the type of transportation provided. They ruled that it references the necessary conditions in which transportation needs to be provided to certain students who may have initially been exempted from the requirement.
鈥淎gain, had the General Assembly intended to require identical transportation between charter and public school students, it could have easily said so 鈥� and presumably would have done so in the first sentence of the statute, not the second, by simply inserting the word 鈥榠dentical鈥� between 鈥榝ree transportation,鈥欌�� Justice Kevin Dougherty in the explanation of the majority鈥檚 opinion.
Still, the debate may not be totally resolved.
The plaintiffs raised some constitutional concerns during the trial that the state Supreme Court did not consider in its final ruling. That may leave room for charter schools to challenge the constitutionality of the law in a separate suit.
Sonya Meadows, senior director of government relations at Propel Schools, told Spotlight PA that before pursuing such a case, she is focused on working with lawmakers to rewrite the state鈥檚 requirements to rectify the 鈥渋nequity鈥� impacting charter schools students.
Some of the plans that Propel Schools parents have challenged in Western Pennsylvania would see students as young as riding public transit to and from school.
鈥淭hey shouldn鈥檛 be able to say, 鈥榃ell, if you go to a school district school, we鈥檙e going to give you a school bus, but if you go to a public charter school, here鈥檚 a public bus pass.鈥� That鈥檚 not equitable,鈥� Meadows said. 鈥淚n fact, that鈥檚 rather discriminatory.鈥�
The debate could spark further tensions in the state Capitol, where alternatives to traditional public schools remain a constant sticking point.
Republican lawmakers are looking to undo much of the state Supreme Court ruling, and require schools to provide charter students 鈥� specifically, ones younger than high school age 鈥� with transportation 鈥渦nder the same terms and conditions, including mode of transportation鈥� as traditional students. Neither chamber has advanced out of committee.
State Sen. Dawn Keefer (R., York) is behind her chamber鈥檚 proposal to prevent charter students in kindergarten through eighth grade from being moved to public transit. The House鈥檚 version would be kindergarten through sixth grade.
鈥淲e don鈥檛 even let them go to recess by themselves,鈥� Keefer told Spotlight PA, 鈥渂ut we鈥檙e going to let a, you know, seven (or) eight year old on a public bus?鈥�
State House Education Committee Chair Pete Schweyer (D., Lehigh) said the transportation of charter students points to larger issues in how Pennsylvania funds school transportation. State law is so outdated, he said, that bus drivers are required to maintain print logs of their mileage and are barred from using digital methods, like GPS.
Schwyer noted that the state House near-unanimously to update that provision and collect data intended to help lawmakers make future changes to regulations. He jabbed at Republicans for not considering the bill in the state Senate.
鈥淎t any given point in time, they could decide to actually take a look at the transportation issue and not try to once again divide the charter school community from the traditional school district community,鈥� Schweyer said.
State Senate Education Committee Chair Lynda Schlegel Culver (R., Northumberland) did not respond to a request for comment on the court case, or the school transportation-related bills.
___
This story was originally published by and distributed through a partnership with The Associated Press.
Copyright © 2026 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, written or redistributed.
