Pennsylvania’s charter schools are facing a transportation issue that has created a deeply unfair situation for thousands of students. School districts are required by law to provide free transportation to eligible charter school students, but a recent court ruling allows districts to decide that charter students will receive a different and often less convenient form of transportation than students attending district schools. That means a child can live in the same neighborhood as a district-school student, yet receive completely different transportation simply because the child and their tax-paying family chose a public charter school.
The problem is already happening. Some PA charter schools will no longer receive traditional yellow school bus transportation. Instead, students in Pittsburgh will receive Pittsburgh Regional Transit passes. The situation results in some PA elementary public charter school students taking public transportation to school. While yellow school bus service requires students to be picked up by their homes, public transportation in many areas is not near a child’s home. Some students will need to walk great distances to get to a public transit bus stop. In Philadelphia, public charter school students receive public transportation SEPTA passes for grades six through twelve. Kindergarten students do not receive yellow bus or SEPTA passes. These inequities are throughout the State. Suburban school districts immediately outside the city limits have yellow bus transportation from kindergarten to twelfth grade.
This raises a basic question: Why should a child receive different transportation simply because they attend a charter school?
Charter schools are public schools. Their students are public school students. Their families paid the same property taxes as their neighbors. Families should not be punished for choosing a public charter school by being given a transportation system that is less safe, less direct or less practical than the one provided to students attending the local district school.
The Pennsylvania Supreme Court recently ruled on this exact issue in Betty Bell and Propel Schools v. Wilkinsburg School District, No. 23 WAP 2024, decided January 21, 2026. The court ruled that the Charter School Law allows school districts to provide charter students with a different form of free transportation than district students.
But the court's decision does not make the situation fair. In fact, the dissenting opinions highlight the serious inequity created by the ruling. Judge Wallace of the Commonwealth Court argued that the original Charter School Law was intended to provide charter students with the same transportation options as students attending traditional public schools.
The history of the case is important. In Bell v. Wilkinsburg School District, 283 A.3d 245 (Pa. 2022), the Pennsylvania Supreme Court previously addressed whether Wilkinsburg had to obtain state approval before changing its transportation system. The case was then sent back to the Commonwealth Court to address whether the district could legally provide public transit instead of school buses. The Commonwealth Court ruled in favor of the district in January 2024 and the Supreme Court ultimately affirmed that position in 2026.
There is something fundamentally troubling about this result. The transportation system should not become a penalty for choosing a charter school. In Pennsylvania and across the country, charter schools are public schools and state law clearly recognizes them as such; then their students should not be treated as second-class public school students. In PA, the per-pupil allotment is different across the State because funding is funneled through the school district. School districts skim off a piece of that funding to be used for transportation and other expenses. Therefore, charter schools receive less money to educate a child from the same neighborhood as a child who went to traditional public school. Both families paid the same property taxes.
The issue is especially troubling for younger children. Expecting a five-, seven- or ten-year-old to navigate public transportation, possibly transfer buses and walk significant distances while a child attending the district school receives a yellow school bus is difficult to defend as equal treatment. The Commonwealth Court itself acknowledged the serious safety concerns that can arise when young children use public transportation.
This is not simply a debate about yellow school buses. It is a question of equal access to public education. Families should be able to choose the public school that best meets their child's needs without having to accept an inferior transportation option as the price of that choice.
Pennsylvania should fix this inequity. Charter school students should not be treated as less deserving of safe, reliable and appropriate transportation than their traditional public school peers. The law may currently permit different treatment, but that does not make the policy fair.
The problem is already happening. Some PA charter schools will no longer receive traditional yellow school bus transportation. Instead, students in Pittsburgh will receive Pittsburgh Regional Transit passes. The situation results in some PA elementary public charter school students taking public transportation to school. While yellow school bus service requires students to be picked up by their homes, public transportation in many areas is not near a child’s home. Some students will need to walk great distances to get to a public transit bus stop. In Philadelphia, public charter school students receive public transportation SEPTA passes for grades six through twelve. Kindergarten students do not receive yellow bus or SEPTA passes. These inequities are throughout the State. Suburban school districts immediately outside the city limits have yellow bus transportation from kindergarten to twelfth grade.
This raises a basic question: Why should a child receive different transportation simply because they attend a charter school?
Charter schools are public schools. Their students are public school students. Their families paid the same property taxes as their neighbors. Families should not be punished for choosing a public charter school by being given a transportation system that is less safe, less direct or less practical than the one provided to students attending the local district school.
The Pennsylvania Supreme Court recently ruled on this exact issue in Betty Bell and Propel Schools v. Wilkinsburg School District, No. 23 WAP 2024, decided January 21, 2026. The court ruled that the Charter School Law allows school districts to provide charter students with a different form of free transportation than district students.
But the court's decision does not make the situation fair. In fact, the dissenting opinions highlight the serious inequity created by the ruling. Judge Wallace of the Commonwealth Court argued that the original Charter School Law was intended to provide charter students with the same transportation options as students attending traditional public schools.
The history of the case is important. In Bell v. Wilkinsburg School District, 283 A.3d 245 (Pa. 2022), the Pennsylvania Supreme Court previously addressed whether Wilkinsburg had to obtain state approval before changing its transportation system. The case was then sent back to the Commonwealth Court to address whether the district could legally provide public transit instead of school buses. The Commonwealth Court ruled in favor of the district in January 2024 and the Supreme Court ultimately affirmed that position in 2026.
-
The transportation system should not become a penalty for choosing a charter school.
There is something fundamentally troubling about this result. The transportation system should not become a penalty for choosing a charter school. In Pennsylvania and across the country, charter schools are public schools and state law clearly recognizes them as such; then their students should not be treated as second-class public school students. In PA, the per-pupil allotment is different across the State because funding is funneled through the school district. School districts skim off a piece of that funding to be used for transportation and other expenses. Therefore, charter schools receive less money to educate a child from the same neighborhood as a child who went to traditional public school. Both families paid the same property taxes.
The issue is especially troubling for younger children. Expecting a five-, seven- or ten-year-old to navigate public transportation, possibly transfer buses and walk significant distances while a child attending the district school receives a yellow school bus is difficult to defend as equal treatment. The Commonwealth Court itself acknowledged the serious safety concerns that can arise when young children use public transportation.
This is not simply a debate about yellow school buses. It is a question of equal access to public education. Families should be able to choose the public school that best meets their child's needs without having to accept an inferior transportation option as the price of that choice.
Pennsylvania should fix this inequity. Charter school students should not be treated as less deserving of safe, reliable and appropriate transportation than their traditional public school peers. The law may currently permit different treatment, but that does not make the policy fair.
