New Porsche Cayenne Turbo Electric tips the scales at 5,831 pounds.
Flagship electric SUV even outweighs the mighty Ford F-150 Raptor.
Compared to the Rivian R1S Quad Motor, the Cayenne seems light.
While we’re not convinced there were many Porsche customers clamoring for a high-powered electric SUV, there’s no denying that the new Cayenne Electric boasts some impressive figures, chief among them, the fact that it’s the most powerful series production model ever built in Zuffenhausen.
In Turbo guise, the Cayenne Electric produces a staggering 1,139 horsepower and sprints from 0 to 62 mph (100 km/h) in just 2.5 seconds.
That puts it squarely in hypercar territory, yet this is a full-size luxury SUV, complete with every comfort you could possibly need or not need. Porsche also claims it can cover up to 488 miles (785 km) on a single charge when driven in urban conditions.
Still, like many high-performance EVs, the Cayenne Electric’s greatest strength is matched by a significant drawback. Weight remains the elephant in the room, and in this case, it’s a glaringly heavy one.
How Heavy Is Too Heavy?
A look at the technical breakdown for the Cayenne Turbo Electric shows a curb weight of 5,831 lbs (2,645 kg) according to the DIN standard, or 5,997 lbs (2,720 kg) under the latest EU Directive, which factors in a 165-lb (75-kg) driver.
That makes this the heaviest road-going Porsche ever produced. Unless the engineers in Stuttgart have performed some kind of chassis sorcery, hiding that mass will be a serious challenge.
For context, consider the new hybrid BMW M5, a car already heavily criticized, even mocked, for its bulk. The sedan tips the scales at 5,390 lbs (2,444 kg), while the M5 Touring version edges up to 5,530 lbs (2,508 kg). The Cayenne Turbo Electric surpasses both with room to spare.
It also outweighs the Ford F-150 Raptor, which comes in at 5,710 lbs (2,590 kg), and is not far behind the Raptor R at 5,950 lbs (2,698 kg). Even standard versions of the F-150, such as the V8-powered Regular Cab at 4,948 lbs (2,245 kg) and the SuperCrew at 5,038 lbs (2,285 kg), appear relatively light in comparison.
The new all-electric Cayenne is also roughly on par with the Hyundai Ioniq 9, which weighs between 5,523 lbs (2,505 kg) and 5,908 lbs (2,680 kg) depending on the specification. However, it’s worth noting that the Ioniq 9 is a three-row SUV and is longer and wider than the Porsche.
Heavy, But Not the Heaviest
That said, the Cayenne isn’t quite as weighty as the Rivian R1S Quad Motor, which reaches an astonishing 6,824 lbs (3,169 kg). Despite that, the Rivian’s 1,025 horsepower still falls short of the Porsche’s output.
The launch of the Cayenne Electric comes at an interesting time for the Porsche brand. Not too long ago, it had been planning to only sell the future Cayman and Boxster models with electric powertrains and had been planning a flagship seven-seat SUV, codenamed the K1, to be also sold exclusively as an EV.
Those plans have now shifted. Porsche has confirmed that all of these future models will be re-engineered to accommodate combustion power as well.
VW’s 2025 ID.Cross concept is being developed into a production EV.
Electric counterpart to subcompact T-Cross ushers in new VW design.
Concept had a front-mounted 208 hp motor and a 261-mile range.
Volkswagen’s smallest electric SUV has crawled out of the concept studio and onto public roads. Our spy photographers just snagged the very first shots of the ID.Cross prototype, giving us an early look at the subcompact EV that VW previewed with the ID.Cross concept at last September’s Munich Auto Show.
It’s still wrapped in camouflage, but even through the swirls, the production version looks remarkably close to the original concept.
The proportions look almost copy-and-paste. The ID.Cross sits has short overhangs, a rounded nose and a slightly pinched tail that mirrors the concept’s “urban-friendly” footprint.
Expect the real thing to land close to the concept’s numbers, which were designed to squeeze maximum cabin space from a small footprint: roughly 4,160 mm (163.8 inches) in length, making it shorter than America’s Taos and right in the heart of the subcompact EV class.
Even under wrap, the headlight and taillight outlines look familiar from the Munich show, hinting at VW’s newest light-bar family face. And though we can’t see them, we’re sure the three illuminated rectangles embedded in the concept’s black C-pillar have also made the cut.
The concept’s whimsical yoga-studio-on-wheels interior probably won’t survive 100 percent unchanged, though, so don’t expect pastel mood lighting or Zen-garden textures in the base model.
But VW’s latest compact cabin architecture, with a bigger infotainment screen and improved physical switchgear, should appear here.
What Powers It?
SH Proshots
Under the skin, the ID.Cross rides on the latest evolution of the MEB platform, tweaked for a new front-wheel-drive generation of small EVs including the ID.Polo.
The concept was pitched with a single-motor setup producing around 208 hp (211 PS / 155 kW), and that’s a believable target for the production version, though we expect to also see less powerful versions join the lineup to improve accessibility.
VW didn’t give a battery size for the concept but claimed it could deliver a 261-mile (420 km) WLTP electric range, and again, that’s a solid indicator about the kind of touring ability we’ll get from the real thing when it makes its global debut next year.
Will The US Get It?
US sales are yet to be confirmed, but in Europe the ID.Cross will cost from around £25k/€28k ($32k) when it goes head to head with other electric crossovers like the Kia EV2, Toyota Urban Cruiser, and its VW Group cousins, the Skoda Epiq and Cupra Raval.
Ford has introduced the 2026 Transit and E-Transit.
They sport minor styling tweaks and updated technology.
Pricing soars as the electric cargo van costs an extra $2,260.
The Ford Transit remains America’s best-selling commercial van, and for 2026, it’s rolling out a host of updates designed to keep it ahead of the pack. As part of the makeover, it’s been given a “digital refresh” as well as a few styling tweaks.
Starting outside, there’s new badging and updated taillights that now offer integrated blind spot sensors. Fleet customers will also find a new Wild Green Metallic paint job.
While the exterior styling changes are easy to overlook, the 2026 Transit has an all-new electrical architecture. Ford said it “enables new digital capabilities, over-the-air software updates, and future scalability.”
There’s also an updated 8-inch digital instrument cluster as well as a newly standard 12-inch SYNC 4 infotainment system. The model also gains a 5G modem and a keyless push button ignition.
Updated Tech Suite
All Transits come equipped with Ford Co-Pilot360, which now includes a Forward Sensing System as well as a Reverse Sensing System on Cargo and Passenger variants. Customers can also upgrade to the optional Co-Pilot360 2.0 suite, which provides additional capabilities.
Given the Transit is a commercial vehicle, there are a number of fleet-friendly upgrades. This includes Ford Pro Telematics, which enables managers to keep track of their vehicles and how they’re being used. The van also has a newly standard Vehicle Maintenance Monitor, which helps customers stay up-to-date on maintenance to prevent downtime.
Additional changes are limited, but the E-Transit gains a vapor injection heat pump that promises to increase efficiency. The E-Transit Chassis Cab and Cutaway also gain a new variant with a 156-inch (3,962 mm) wheelbase.
What Else Is New?
Rounding out the highlights are several new and updated options including a Connectivity Package, which includes a year of unlimited Wi-Fi, audio and video streaming, Alexa Built-in, and available Connected Navigation.
The Delivery Package for Cargo Van and Cutaway variants also gains Delivery Assist, which automatically activates the hazard lights and closes all open windows when the vehicle is put in park. It also locks the doors when the driver exits the vehicle.
While that’s just a brief overview of the changes, the Transit offers a 3.5-liter V6 with 275 hp (205 kW / 279 PS) and 260 lb-ft (352 Nm) of torque. Customers can also get a 3.5-liter EcoBoost V6 developing 300 hp (224 kW / 304 PS) and 400 lb-ft (542 Nm).
If your company wants to go green, there’s the E-Transit. It features an 89 kWh battery pack as well as a rear-mounted motor producing 266 hp (198 kW / 269 PS).
Pricing starts at $44,890, while the E-Transit begins at $48,150. The latter is a huge price hike as the 2025 E-Transit Cutaway began at $45,700. Likewise, the E-Transit Cargo Van has gone from $51,000 to $53,260.
India’s Supreme Court proposes gradual ban on luxury combustion cars.
Move could accelerate electrification without hurting mass-market buyers.
Judges say premium EVs already match gasoline and diesel rivals.
EV adoption in India, the world’s most populous nation, has been slower than policymakers anticipated, but the country’s Supreme Court now believes it may have found a new lever to accelerate change.
The judges have urged the government to consider a gradual phase-out of luxury ICE cars, arguing that a targeted approach could push cleaner mobility without disturbing the broader market.
The bench suggests that withdrawing luxury and premium models with combustion engines, including hybrids and plug-in hybrids, could act as a test case for a measured “phased transition” toward electric mobility.
According to Autocar India, EVs already account for around 12 percent of sales in the premium segments, far higher than the 2–3 percent share seen among mass-market models.
Could a Luxury Ban Spark an EV Shift?
Critics point out that luxury vehicles represent a tiny fraction of India’s automotive landscape, arguing that the proposed ban would have a limited impact on national emissions. Others blame the weak scrappage policy for the country’s aging fleet of cars and LCVs which poses a far bigger pollution problem.
Others point instead to the weak vehicle scrappage framework, which leaves aging cars and light commercial vehicles on the road far beyond their prime, an issue that poses a much larger pollution challenge.
Even so, the court maintains that an EV-only requirement for high-end models would send a clear signal without harming affordability for the masses and disrupting the nation’s new car market.
As India Today reports, Justice Kant noted that carmakers already offer a range of premium electric models matching the comfort and performance of their combustion counterparts.
He explained, “Since these vehicles cater to a very small and affluent segment, imposing restrictions on high-end petrol and diesel cars can be a starting point. The common man will not be affected.”
Luxury brands such as Mercedes and BMW already maintain substantial zero-emission lineups, yet an internal combustion ban would inevitably reshape their operations in India, bringing possible ripple effects for local employment and supplier investment.
For now, the idea remains a proposal without firm timelines. However, the Supreme Court has asked the government to review its National Electric Mobility Mission Plan, with another hearing scheduled for December.
India’s Attorney General confirmed that the administration is “alive to the idea,” citing ongoing coordination across 13 ministries and departments, covering everything from manufacturing incentives to charging infrastructure.
Ford GM and Stellantis CEOs to testify before Congress in January.
Hearing focuses on pricing, regulations, EV policy, and trade talks.
Senator Ted Cruz calls it a reality check on affordability rules.
For the first time in nearly twenty years, the CEOs of Ford, General Motors, and Stellantis may once again share a table before Congress. The Senate Commerce Committee has called on Ford’s Jim Farley, GM’s Mary Barra, and Stellantis’ Antonio Filosa to testify on January 14 in a high-profile hearing exploring the auto industry’s outlook on federal transportation policy and vehicle affordability.
The session will also delve into the uneasy transition toward electrification, a subject that continues to divide policymakers and automakers alike. Tesla’s VP of Vehicle Engineering, Lars Moravy, has been invited to join the discussion, adding an electric perspective to the mix.
The last time all three Detroit bosses appeared together on Capitol Hill was late 2008 during the financial crisis, bailout negotiations, and a moment when the industry’s future looked genuinely uncertain. This time, the pressure points are different but no less significant.
Why Bring Them Together Now?
Senator Ted Cruz, who’s spearheading the hearing, has titled it “Pedal to the Policy: The Views of the American Auto Industry on the Upcoming Surface Transportation Reauthorization.”
Based on reporting from the Union-Bulletin, the sessions will probe fuel economy and emissions mandates, tariffs, federal EV policy, new-vehicle pricing, and how automakers plan to navigate the next decade. Cruz frames the meeting as a long-overdue reality check on affordability.
“The average price of a car has more than doubled in the past decade,” said Cruz, blaming “onerous government-mandated technologies and radical environmental regulations.”
What’s Driving Up Costs?
No doubt, the average transaction price (ATP) of a new car is quite high these days. Data from Cox Automotive shows that it surpassed $50,000 in September.
A decade ago, that figure was in the low $30,000s. Notably, analysts think the shift is due to several factors, including, but not limited to, regulation. Inflation, tariffs, higher-end trims, and the introduction of more EVs all have a part to play.
Republicans say policy changes earlier this year, including repealing federal EV mandates and CAFE targets under the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, are steps toward lowering prices. However, Cruz argues lawmakers need to go further. This is all happening at a critical point in the U.S. automotive industry too.
The debate comes at a pivotal moment for the U.S. auto sector. The United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA) faces renewal or renegotiation by July 1. If it lapses, the fallout alone could drive vehicle costs higher, regardless of any new legislation.
Tony, Ryan and Taylor recap the lessons, experiences and takeaways from the Transporting Students with Disabilities & Special Needs (TSD) Conference and Trade Show last week. It covered evacuation training in a smoke-filled school bus, legal issues like onboard sexual assaults or objectionable clothing, tips to promote good student behavior, an in-depth session on deafness and much more.
While public awareness campaigns about illegally passing stopped school buses increase nationwide, the National School Bus Loading and Unloading Survey finds that school buses and their drivers accounted for all the student fatalities reported for the 2024-2025 school year.
The 2024-2025 National School Bus Loading and Unloading Survey, released Sunday at the National State Director of Pupil Transportation Services conferences in Washington, D.C., reported that six fatalities occurred in five states, with Louisiana reporting two. Four states did not participate in the survey, the most non-responses since 2015.
Several fatalities during the 2024-2025 school year occurred similarly. In Missouri, a 9-year-old girl had just exited her school bus. As the bus pulled away from the curb and began preparing to turn left, the student ran along the left side of the bus for unknown reasons. She was struck and killed by the rear left wheels.
A similar situation occurred in Wisconsin. A 5-year-old boy had unloaded the school bus at school. However, the student had dropped an item and crawled under the bus to retrieve it as the school bus driver pulled away. The student was struck and killed by the left rear dual wheels.
A 5-year-old Massachusetts boy unloaded from the school bus when the vehicle moved forward, and it struck and killed the child. The boy was killed by the left front wheel.
In Louisiana, a 7-year-old exited the school bus and was walking in front of it as the driver pulled away from the stop. He was struck and killed by the right front and right rear dual wheels of the bus.
Also in Louisiana, a 6-year-old boy was running to catch the school bus. He was in front of the bus as it pulled away from the stop, and he was struck and killed by the front of the school bus.
Similarly, in Texas, a 5-year-old was running to catch the bus. He, too, was in front of the bus as it pulled away from the stop. He was then struck and killed by the left front wheels.
Half of the fatalities took place on the trip to school, the other half on the trip home. All the students killed were under 10 years old. Three were 5 years old. The National School Bus Loading and Unloading Survey stated that during the past 55 years of the survey, 73 percent of fatalities occurred to students 9 years of age and under.
Three of the fatalities took place on a Thursday, and two took place in the month of April. For five of the fatalities, the weather conditions were clear and in daylight, with one being reported during cloudy conditions and one during dark. Two fatalities were reported in rural areas, whereas four were considered urban. In all fatalities, road conditions were dry.
The survey is based on police reports of student fatalities at school bus stops when the bus was on scene at the time of the incident.
Despite the federal government shut down and amid students continuing to die or be injured in the school bus “Danger Zone,” the Senate agreed on the importance of child safety with a resolution designating October 2025 as School Bus Safety Month.
Introduced by Sens. Deb Fischer of Nebraska and Gary Peters of Michigan, Senate Resolution 484 was filed on Nov. 5 and the full chamber agreed via unanimous consent to the language Monday. But it was originally scheduled for a vote on Oct. 1, the first day of the government shutdown.
“We stayed on them every day to get together and vote on it even with the government shutdown, which was very hard to do,” said Ward Leber, founder of the Child Safety Network, which has been the organization championing the resolution since 2013, when current Senate Majority Leader John Thune threw his full support behind it. “When both sides knew internally a deal was going to happen to reopen within a few days, our constant pushing paid off.”
Leber said this year’s resolution is dedicated to the memories of two 11-year-old girls who were killed as they were boarding and exiting their school buses.
“As a sergeant, a supervisor of school resource officers, and most of all as a father, I know the deadly outcome that can occur when drivers illegally pass school buses,” said Sgt. Dan Sperry, who spoke at STN EXPO West in 2016. “My 11-year-old daughter Makayla died in my arms just after stepping off her bus. I am proud to serve alongside the volunteers of CSN’s Senior Advisory Board, and grateful for all of the dedicated school bus professionals working every day to prevent another family from suffering a preventable tragedy.”
Leandra Backner, whose daughter was killed in 2022 after she tripped and was run over by her school bus, said “it warms my hear that the U.S. Senate has upheld School Bus Safety Month since 2013, honoring Annaliese’s memory through its ongoing commitment to safety.”
Sen. Peters said in a statement parents should have “peace of mind that when they drop their kids off at the bus stop, they will get to school and back home safely.”
The resolution results in funding for an NFL-themed PSA that alerts the public when it’s not safe to pass, especially when a stopped school bus is involved. The program is scheduled to launch in early 2026 around the Super Bowl.
It also touts the CSN Safe Ride campaign that offers school bus driver training, school bus technology, and free safety and security resources to school districts. To date, CSN said it has provided security awareness training materials to over 14,000 public and private schools, trained over 125,000 school bus operators and provided more than 175,000 counter-terrorism guides.
Peters also introduced last month the Brake for Kids Act to create a PSA about the dangers of illegally passing school buses.
In his home state, the Michigan Association for Pupil Transportation recently filmed a PSA with NASCAR driver Ryan Preece, a member of the RFK Racing Team owned by Jack Roush, the founder and chairman of Roush Enterprises that includes ROUSH CleanTech. The company provides propane autogas and gasoline fuel systems to Blue Bird in partnership with Ford.
The Genesis GV90 has been spied with its coach doors open.
The crossover eschews a B-pillar, just like the Neolun concept.
An all-new platform could underpin the EV when it debuts.
The Genesis GV90 is taking an eternity to develop, but work continues on the coach door variant. However, the long gestation period is apparently wearing on employees as a couple of them decided to ignore a warning saying “Do not open doors!”
Thanks to their mistake, spy photographers were able to get a glimpse of the doors in action. As you’d expect, the doors open and close automatically to ensure entry and egress is effortless.
More notably, the luxury crossover eschews a B-pillar as there’s an uninterrupted side opening. While our view is partially blocked, this is an interesting development as even Rolls-Royces have a thick pillar separating the front and rear passenger compartments.
The feature was previewed on the Neolun concept and Genesis previously said B-pillarless coach doors provide “much more open interior space” while also maximizing “convenient passenger access.” At the time, they hinted development had reached a point where using the design on road-going models was “now feasible.”
SHproshots
That’s certainly the case and it appears Genesis will be moving the traditional B-pillar support to the doors. As part of the change, we can see pronounced locking mechanisms on the door sill and ceiling. The front section of the rear door also appears notably thicker than the rest of the panel.
Besides giving us a glimpse of the doors in action, the latest pictures reveal the crossover will have power front and rear seats with a bewildering number of adjustments. We can also see blue and purple leather as well as metallic accents and contrast piping.
Previous spy photos have shown an elegant second-row with captain’s chairs that are separated by a large center console. The latter appears to house a wireless smartphone charger as well as an integrated tablet.
Platform and Powertrain
The company hasn’t said much about the model lately, but the GV90 is expected to ride on the new eM platform. The architecture is expected to be an evolution of the existing E-GMP platform, but incorporate the latest advancements in electric vehicle technology.
Although full details remain unclear, the GV90 should be more advanced than the Kia EV9 and Hyundai Ioniq 9. The latter features a 110.3 kWh battery pack as well as a dual-motor all-wheel drive system producing up to 422 hp (315 kW / 429 PS) and 516 lb-ft (700 Nm) of torque. With that powertrain, the model has a range of 311 miles (501 km).
Ford found the Mach-E used a full mile more wiring than Tesla’s Model 3.
Jim Farley said the teardown of Tesla and Chinese EVs was “humbling.”
Chinese automakers’ rapid progress left Ford racing to catch up globally.
Like many long-established carmakers, Ford has found itself under growing pressure from Tesla at home and an increasingly assertive wave of Chinese manufacturers abroad.
These newer players seem more adaptable, often leading in electric-vehicle design and software integration, areas where legacy automakers like Ford have struggled to keep pace. Chief executive Jim Farley doesn’t shy away from acknowledging the scale of that challenge.
Not long after Ford’s boss remarked that the threat from Chinese automakers now exceeds what Japanese carmakers posed in the 1980s, Jim Farley described the “shocking” moment that spurred him to rethink the company’s direction.
He said Ford’s engineers were taken aback when they began tearing down both the Tesla Model 3 and several Chinese-built electric cars, realizing just how far ahead those manufacturers had moved in terms of cost, efficiency, and software integration.
“I was very humbled when we took apart the first Model 3 Tesla and started to take apart the Chinese vehicles,” he told former Wall Street Journal reporter Monica Langley on the Office Hours: Business Edition podcast. “When we took them apart, it was shocking what we found.”
What Ford Found Inside
Ford’s engineers quickly learned that the Mustang Mach-E carried an extra mile of electrical wiring compared with the Model 3, adding unnecessary weight and complexity. That revelation, and others like it, convinced Farley to separate the company’s electric operations into a dedicated arm, the Model E division, in 2022.
“EVs are exploding in China,” Farley said, noting that the Chinese government had “put its foot on the economic scale” in support of battery-powered vehicles.
Financially, Ford’s move to establish the Model E division has yet to bear fruit, losing more than $5 billion last year. However, Farley isn’t prepared to throw in the towel.
“I knew it was going to be brutal business-wise,” he said. “My ethos is, take on the hardest problems as fast as you can and do it sometimes in public because you’ll solve them quicker that way.”
If You Can’t Beat ‘Em, Join ‘Em
Last year, Farley revealed that he had been driving a Xiaomi SU7 daily and praised the electric sedan. Evidently, he understands not only the importance of answering the threat posed by the Chinese but also just how quickly Ford needs to respond.
One of the company’s most crucial upcoming projects is a mid-size electric pickup priced around $30,000. Built on a new architecture designed to underpin several future models, it represents the next test of whether Ford can match the speed and efficiency of the competition
EverDriven CEO Mitch Bowling reviews how the alternative transportation company prioritizes safety standards and promotes collaborative brainstorming to provide safe service to the ever-growing population of students with special needs.
AlphaRoute CEO John Hanlon shares real-life stories about districts that have optimized daily operations by leveraging routing technology and discusses how the upcoming AI solution “Alphie” can help.
Keba Baldwin is the director of transportation for Prince George’s County Public Schools in Maryland and STN’s newest Transportation Director of the Year. He joins us to discuss his career history and leadership style.
China’s draft rule could require cars to take longer to reach 100 km/h (62 mph).
Drivers would need to manually enable faster acceleration after every startup.
Regulation targets all passenger cars, but quick EVs would feel the biggest hit.
The electric car age has rewritten the meaning of quick, with even family runabouts now capable of supercar-style launches from a set of lights. What once belonged to exotic badges has become a party trick for mid-range sedans and crossovers alike.
Now China’s latest draft vehicle regulation looks set to spoil the fun, or at least delay it. Under a proposed update to the National Standard, every passenger car would need a default mode in which it takes no less than five seconds to reach 100 km/h (62 mph) at startup, unless the driver manually selects a quicker setting.
The draft title “Technical Specifications for Power-Driven Vehicles Operating on Roads” appears to be part of a broader safety and road behavior initiative in China. It is intended to replace the current GB 7258-2017 standard that didn’t impose such restrictions.
Section 10.5.4 of the new proposal states: “After each power-on/ignition of a passenger vehicle (excluding automatic engine start-stop), the vehicle should be in a state where the 100 km/h acceleration time is not less than 5 seconds.”
The default performance-restricting mode at startup could work much like the output-limiting Eco setting found in most EVs, managed entirely through software. Drivers could still switch to a faster mode, though they’d need to repeat the process every time they power on the car.
If approved, the rule would apply to all passenger cars in China regardless of powertrain, though it would most affect the growing fleet of lightning-fast EVs.
Models like the Xiaomi SU7 Ultra (1.98 seconds to 100 km/h), Zeekr 001 FR (2.02 seconds), Tesla Model S Plaid (2.1 seconds), and BYD Yangwang U9 (2.36 seconds) would all fall under the new restriction, even if only temporarily after startup.
Speed Warnings On Your Limo
A separate draft titled “Safety Specifications for Power-Driven Vehicles Operating on Roads” includes another speed-related rule, this time targeting longer passenger models.
Section 10.5.1 reads: “Passenger vehicles with a length of 6 m or more shall have an overspeed alarm function, capable of triggering an alarm via visual or audible signals when the speed exceeds the maximum permissible speed (the maximum permissible speed shall not exceed 100km/h), except for those with compliant speed limiting functions or devices.”
While most large SUVs and minivans stay below the six-meter mark, the rule could apply to stretched limousines. One such example is the previous-generation Rolls-Royce Phantom VII Extended Wheelbase, which measures 6,092 mm (239.8 in). Its successor, slightly shorter at 5,982 mm (235.5 in), would just avoid triggering the alarm requirement.
FRISCO, Texas — When Lisa Navarra stood before a room of Transporting Students with Disabilities (TSD) and Special Needs Conference attendees, she didn’t see people who were “just” drivers, trainers, supervisors or directors. She saw leaders. Leaders who manage people, time and safety every day. Those who guide drivers to guide students to be consistent, calm and confident before the first bell even rings.
“Transportation is so much more than transit,” she reminded them durig her Monday morning keynote. “You create the environment that students step into each morning, one that can set the tone for their entire day.”
For Navarra, the journey from special education teacher to school transportation trainer was fueled by purpose, and a realization that behavior management, emotional regulation and growth mindset strategies weren’t just for classrooms. They belonged on school buses, too, she said.
Her message was simple yet transformative: When transportation professionals see themselves as educators and role models, they empower students to feel safe, regulate their emotions and be ready to learn.
She noted the process starts with meeting the kids where they were at.
“But where are we at?” she asked, adding another question to consider is, “What do I need to do to reach this child, to ride safely?”
Supervisors, she noted, need to support and empower drivers to better breakdown the silos between education and transportation.
She said when one sees themself as a professional who is prepared to manage challenges, it gives a sense a validation and thus a sense of purpose. Instead of waiting to see what students are capable of, be proactive in demonstrating and announcing behaviors they want to see on the bus, she advised.
Navarra asked, “Why are we making things so complicated?” She noted the impact of a positive school bus environment, speaking the language educators speak and creating a safe, meaningful environment that kids are ready to learn in.
Sometimes drivers need strategies on how to teach developmentally appropriate behavior, she said, adding that students might not know what safe behavior is. If they don’t explain what safe behavior should look like, she said students will never know how to meet expectations.
For drivers who are stuck in a rut or look at driving as “just a job,” she encouraged attendees to remind them that they are managing the learning environment. Raymond Forsberg, director of transportation at Mesquite Independent School District in Texas, said he tells his school bus drivers they manage people, time and money.
“I remind them how they’re leaders. I compare what they do, to what I do. I tell them how they manage people, time and money,” he said. “Let them know they are part of the ownership. Remind them of how they are leaders. We’re all here for the paycheck. The people drivers manage are the students, for time they have keep to the schedule and the money part is the 150,000 vehicle they’re driving.”
Additionally, Navarra provided examples and research that illustrates the importance of not praising the ability, but the process and effort that students or even drivers give.
Phrases like “great job” or “you’re so smart” don’t provide the student with context into what type of behavior is correct and needs to be recreated. Instead, she advised, saying phrases like, “You did a great job being safe when you entered the bus and put your seatbelt on.”
Other examples of behavior-specific praise are:
“I have noticed how you are trying your best to speak quietly today. Thank you.”
“I admire the way you are trying to keep your feet out of the aisle.”
“You took a breath when the bus got noisy, and you stayed calm.”
“You were very thoughtful when you said hello to the new student.”
She underscored the importance of using behavior-specific praise with action and outcome, which can lead to a learning experience. Navarra continued, saying general praise can sound encouraging, but it does not clearly communicate the behaviors we want students to internalize and demonstrate independently.
She provided factors to consider, such as the setting (private or public) and the type of praise (non-behavior specific or specific.)
She provided the following guidelines on how to praise:
Be sincere
Be specific
Praise students on the ‘what’ they can change
Be mindful when praising easily earned achievements
Be mindful when praising for doing what they love
Encourage mastery of skills instead of comparing themselves to others
Bobbi Bican, the transportation account manager for Lincoln Intermediate Unit #12 in New Oxford, Pennsylvania, said following the keynote positive feedback and not settling for non-specific phrases like, “Great job” resonated for her.
Instead of settling for non-specific praise, she said she’s going to try and re-phrase her praise by saying, “Great job, sitting down in your seat today, being safe.” She noted that she learned the importance of showing the behavior and building that safe environment.
“I’m so excited to have learned that today,” she said, adding she plans to put some systems in place with her drivers and team to “give them the power.”
VW unveiled the ID. Unyx 08 in China, based on the ID.EVO concept.
The196.9 inch-long electric SUV closely retains the concept’s design.
Offered with single or dual motors, it delivers up to 435 miles of range.
Six months after unveiling the ID.EVO at the 2025 Shanghai Auto Show, Volkswagen has released photos of the production version, now officially named the ID. Unyx 08.
It’s a fully electric SUV scheduled to go on sale next year, joining VW’s steadily growing electric lineup in China. The introduction of this model reflects the brand’s continued push into the world’s largest EV market, where new entries arrive at a relentless pace.
The ID. Unyx 08 is the newest model to roll out of Volkswagen Anhui, the joint venture between JAC Motors and the German automaker. The EV was developed through Volkswagen’s collaboration with Xpeng, with more models to follow in the near future including an electric sedan.
The exterior design stays remarkably close to the original concept, retaining its clean, sculpted surfaces, frameless doors, blacked-out A-pillars, and prominent rear shoulders. A cool touch is the illuminated wolf badge on the third brake light under the rear spoiler.
How Much Has Changed From The Concept?
A closer look reveals only minor changes for production. The headlights and taillights have been reshaped slightly, while new shut lines appear on the hood and tailgate. You’ll also spot visible ADAS sensors, flush-fitting door handles, and light adjustments to the front bumper intake and rear diffuser.
In one of the official images, the SUV sits on the same five-spoke alloy wheels as the concept, featuring a copper diamond-cut finish and Brembo brake calipers.
Volkswagen hasn’t released interior photos yet but confirmed that the Unyx 08 will feature an onboard AI assistant and L2++ driver assistance. Based on current trends in China’s EV sector, it’s safe to expect a large central infotainment display complemented by a compact digital instrument cluster behind the steering wheel.
The SUV measures 5,000 mm (196.9 inches) in length, 1,954 mm (76.9 inches) in width, and 1,688 mm (66.5 inches) in height, with a wheelbase stretching 3,030 mm (119.3 inches).
That makes it 318 mm (12.5 inches) longer than the U.S.-spec Tiguan and 101 mm (4 inches) shorter than the Atlas, though its wheelbase surpasses both.
Unlike some rivals offering range-extender setups, the ID. Unyx 08 will be sold exclusively as a battery-electric model. It’s built on an 800V electrical architecture and will come in single- and dual-motor versions, promising a CLTC range of more than 700 km (435 miles).
Data from China’s Ministry of Industry and Information Technology (MIIT) lists the rear motor at 308 hp (230 kW / 313 PS) and the front motor at 188 hp (140 kW / 190 PS), producing a combined 496 hp (370 kW / 503 PS) in the all-wheel-drive configuration.
Power comes from a CATL-supplied lithium-iron-phosphate battery, though capacity details remain undisclosed.
Marty Savino, national account manager for School-Radio, shares how reliable bus radios support student safety and provide dependable communication services for school bus operations.
For the three-year anniversary of the founding of FirstAlt by First Student, Vice President Gregg Prettyman addresses common misconceptions about alternative transportation safety standards, as well as a Samsara partnership incorporating live video for added oversight.
Tim Logan, director of transportation for Garland Independent School District in Texas, and John Daniels, vice president of marketing for Transfinder, discuss how Transfinder technology helps the transportation department streamline operations and better serve students with special needs and their families.
FRISCO, Texas — Federal and state special education policy expert Glenna Wright-Gallo delivered a transformative message Sunday at the Transporting Students with Disabilities and Special Needs (TSD) Conference about moving beyond mere compliance by creating meaningful educational experiences for students with disabilities, particularly through transportation services.
The general session underscored a fundamental message: transportation is not about moving students from one place to another, but about creating opportunities for learning, growth and inclusion.
Wright-Gallo, the former assistant secretary of the U.S. Department of Education’s Office of Special Education and Rehabilitation Services during the Biden administration and currently vice president of policy for assistive technology company Everway, began by challenging the audience views on the traditional approach to compliance.
“Compliance for the sake of compliance isn’t effective,” she stated.
She illustrated this point by comparing compliance to speed limit signs — many motorists don’t naturally slow down simply because a sign exists. Instead, she urged student transportation professionals to view their work as a critical component of student learning and access. “No matter what happens, no matter what political party is in the majority, education is a bipartisan issue, and children don’t have time for adults to get it together, right?” she said as as the audience applauded.
The presentation dove into recent policy shifts, highlighting how federal guidance is evolving to view transportation as more than a logistical challenge. “Transportation is access,” she emphasized, explaining that recent joint guidance from the U.S. Department of Education and U.S. Department of Transportation now explicitly frames transportation as a civil rights issue directly linked to student attendance and academic success.
During interactive group discussions, attendees revealed significant challenges in interdepartmental communication. One participant shared an example of managing a student who has an autism spectrum disorder, describing how they created reasonable modifications like positioning the student behind the driver to manage specific behavioral challenges. Another transportation director discussed the complexities of coordinating with special education departments, noting frequent communication gaps and last-minute changes that impact transportation planning.
Technology emerged as a potential solution to these challenges. Wright-Gallo encouraged innovative approaches, with one participant sharing how they used AI to create monthly training modules that build upon each other.
“Using AI, I made a training for every month that builds upon the previous months. I present it to my coordinators when we have our monthly meetings, and then they take it out and give it to their drivers that work under them,” explained John Haas, transportation director for Onslow County Schools in North Carolina. “That way, my whole district is being trained on the same thing.”
The funding landscape presented another critical challenge. Wright-Gallo acknowledged the uncertainties at state and federal levels, with many states still struggling to pass budgets. She proposed creative solutions, including exploring alternative funding sources and developing more collaborative approaches between different educational departments.
A key moment came when Wright-Gallo challenged participants to think beyond traditional compliance metrics. “It doesn’t matter what decision we make if it doesn’t result in something different for a student,” she declared, urging participants to focus on meaningful outcomes rather than bureaucratic checklists.
The discussion around technology was particularly nuanced. While embracing innovation, Wright-Gallo also cautioned against wholesale technological adoption. “Whatever goes into a learning management system comes out of it,” she noted, emphasizing the importance of high-quality initial content and training.
Participants were particularly engaged when discussing strategies for inclusive training and professional development. One transportation director shared their approach of coordinating annual in-service training with the special education department, demonstrating the type of collaborative approach Wright-Gallo advocated.
She concluded her keynote with a powerful call to action: “Lead where you live. Don’t wait for someone to give you the title of leader. Do what’s right.” She challenged participants to identify one concrete action they could take in the next 30 days to improve transportation services for students with disabilities.
Thursday afternoon, Wright-Gallo also presented a breakout session on transforming complex Department of Education guidelines in the form of “Dear Colleague” letters into practical, everyday applications.
She highlighted the intersection of key federal laws like the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) and Section 504, demonstrating how these regulations directly impact transportation services. She shared compelling stories illustrating policy gaps, such as substitute school bus drivers incorrectly denying service animals or mishandling students with neurodivergent conditions.
Regarding service animals, allowed by Section 504 of the ADA, Wright-Gallo clarified that only dogs and miniature horses qualify, and that districts can only ask two specific questions when presented with the request for service: Is the animal is required due to disability rather than being an emotional support animal, and what specific tasks does it perform?
She stressed the importance of avoiding blanket policies that might inadvertently discriminate against students with disabilities.
Funding emerged as another critical theme, with Wright-Gallo revealing multiple potential funding streams for transportation services, including innovative uses of federal funds for training, hiring and supporting student needs. She encouraged transportation directors to explore creative funding approaches and build cross-departmental partnerships.
Assistive technology received significant attention, with Wright-Gallo defining it broadly—from low-tech picture boards to high-tech communication devices. “Assistive technology does not replace a teacher or driver, it enables participation and independence,” she explained, emphasizing that these tools must be accessible during transportation and all school activities.
James Haas, director of transportation for Onslow County Schools in North Carolina, discusses use of AI to help with training during the Sunday, Nov. 9, 2025 keynote at TSD Conference.
FRISCO, Texas — Betsey Helfrich said school district polices never trump the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act or Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act. “There is always an exception for a child with a disability,” said the special education legal expert during her keynote address, Avoiding the Bumps & Legal Hazards in Student Transportation, Saturday during the Transporting Students with Disabilities (TSD) and Special Needs Conference.
Helfrich, who practices special education law in Missouri and Kansas, provided an overview of legal updates, court cases and compliance practices in student transportation. She focused on students with disabilities under IDEA and Section 504. The session emphasized how transportation decisions intersect with legal requirements, equity and student safety, urging districts to train staff, document decisions and avoid blanket policies.
Despite current events on the federal level, such as the proposed closing the U.S. Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights (OCR) and funding cuts, IDEA and Section 504 remain fully in effect. Congress would need to vote to disband the U.S. Department of Transportation as well as where IDEA and Section 504 oversight would move to. Funding shifts do not change the underlying rights, she said.
She provided brief overview of each law, noting that attendees in the room should go back to their school districts and teach their school bus drivers the same thing, so they understand the importance of federal requirements.
IDEA is a funded law requiring Individualized Education Programs (IEPs). Transportation can be a “related service” if necessary for a student to benefit from an free and appropriate public education, or FAPE, in the least restrictive environment, or LRE. Section 504 is a civil rights law focused on equal access and nondiscrimination. It is broader, older and less specific than IDEA, and not tied to any monetary gains. She said Section 504 has not been updated since it was written in 1977.
Typically, Helfrich said, students should not have both an IEP and a 504 plan, as everything in the IEP is essentially a contract. She advised being cautious with automatic decisions like “door-to-door” transport, noting that the IEP team must determine needs on a case-by-case basis.
She provided court case examples, citing instances in which parents won and others which districts won, depending on the request and circumstances. She particularly stressed the importance of avoiding discrimination on field trips, extracurricular activities and other events.
For districts that rely on policy, she said they are opening themselves up a lawsuit, as “we don’t do that here” is not a legal defense.
An attendee told School Transportation News following the keynote that Helfrich is very knowledgeable and was able to speak globally on transporting students with disabilities. Even though she touched on different states, the attendee said the rules are the same, because the laws are the same.
The attendee from Maryland said she will be involved in a case next week. She noted that while her school district policy says one thing, it doesn’t mean it meets the needs of the student and federal law. “That was a huge eye-opening moment for me,” she said, noting that they shouldn’t be saying some things as it not legally true.
Helfrich said IEPs should specify supports like wheelchair lifts, on-board attendents or aides, and climate-controlled buses, but parents cannot dictate who drives the student and the type of vehicle used, unless it is pertinent to the child’s disability.
She reminded attendees to inform contractors of relevant IEP details, as they are part of the need-to-know under the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act, or FERPA, that protects student records. It is different from HIPAA, or the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act, which protects personal health information.
Students with disabilities also have additional rights regarding behavior and discipline. However, school bus suspensions over 10 days will trigger a Manifestation Determination Review, where the behavior will be evaluated to determine if it is related or not to a student’s disability.
She said school bus drivers should be trained on Behavior Intervention Plans (BIPs), including triggers and calming strategies. Plus, Helfrich said when a child needs to be searched due to reasonable suspicion of having a weapon, she advised having policies and procedures in place. For instance, does the school bus driver search the child or call for assistance?
While Section 504 provides for the reasonable accommodation of service animals and protects students from being discriminated against for using them, she cautioned the attendees to know the difference between service animals and emotional support animals. Only trained service animals performing tasks are protected under the broader ADA. Emotional support animals are not.
In conclusion, Helfrich advised attendees to train all staff, especially school bus drivers, on IDEA, Section 504 and district procedures. Document all staff participation and policy adherence. She underscored the importance of collaboration with special education and IEP teams before making unilateral changes to the IEP in terms of transportation. She noted the importance of reviewing and updating polices to avoid blanket decisions or discrimination risks and to plan for staff absences and service disruptions.
FRISCO, Texas — Michele Gay turned tragedy into teaching, as she recounted the loss of her daughter, Josephine, in the Sandy Hook Elementary shooting at the opening keynote during the Transporting Students with Disabilities and Special Needs (TSD) Conference.
Now the co-founder and executive director of Safe and Sound Schools, Gay discussed Friday afternoon her personal journey and how she overcame a point in her life when she couldn’t see a future after the murder of her daughter, 19 of her classmates, and six school staff members. What helped her, she said, was rethinking school safety with another mother, Alyssa Parker, who also lost her daughter in the shooting.
Gay, who started her career as a special education teacher at age 21, said she had no training for how to keep children safe. She noted that the school district and those of the companies at the conference have something stated in their mission statements relating to safety. Yet, many forget to mention the how.
“Our Super Bowl is safe kids at school,” Gay said as she showed a chart outlining the framework for a comprehensive school safety plan and development.
She noted that if a child has a monitor or aide, often those school employees are viewed as the sole safety plan. However, she cautioned that mentality as when it comes to safety, “We’re all in this together.”
School safety is everybody’s job, and it’s the core of what people do. She explained that safety is more than procedures owned by one team and it must be embedded across all aspects of school districts. She advised rethinking how safety is taught, and said that it should be developmentally appropriate, low-stress and skill-based.
Don’t DIY safety, she said, adding that it’s important to coordinate and comply. Be vocal about safety and work through codes and compliance with experts and partners. A properly secured door, for example, is a simple but powerful layer of protection. Gay asked those in the room to be loud when it comes to student safety to and represent what they know.
Keep it simple and non-sensational was another message she encouraged throughout her keynote. Use clear, action-oriented language and minimal supporting icons, she said. Avoid evocative images or drama that create trauma; focus on behaviors and steps kids can take.
She broke down the key considerations for creating a safety plan.
Ask the experts: Who are the experts on your students and your community? In terms of transportation, she said it’s usually the school bus drivers who know the children the best.
All-Hazards Approach: Be prepared for anything. Comprehensive planning, skills and knowledge building, and generalization of skills.
Teaching before Training: Equipping students, building confidence and trust, setting up for successful drills and exercises, building the life skills of safety. Gay said it’s not about pop quizzes, but instead talking to students beforehand on what the training entails and why the bus is built a certain way, for example.
Skills for Life: Tools in the toolbox. Increases safety across settings and circumstances.
No Drama, No Trauma: Focus on skills and behaviors. Skip the sensorial and sensational. Avoid evocative images. Consider your words. What do you want students to do if they’re in danger? She noted it’s not just about doing an evacuation drill, but instead talking about the behavior and steps that students need to take.
Words Matter: Keep it simple. Use action-oriented words. Avoid dramatic words and phrases. Support text with simple images (icons, symbols) and keep them to three. Like Stop, drop and roll. Everyone remembers this saying, but how many actually had to do it?
If you can’t get on board with all those considerations, where do we start, she asked. She said it’s about meeting students where they are. She discussed the ladder of levels, where students can be on different rings based on their age and abilities. Use the ladder to tailor expectations and training intensity, Gay advised.
In terms of training exceptional students, she said standard plans often miss students with disabilities or unique needs. Her daughter Josphine had many exceptional abilities, as she called them, she was diagnosed with autism and later with global apraxia and apraxia of speech. Gay advised creating individualized, portable plans so any staff (including substitutes) know the supports required.
The inclusive safety planning six-step process includes:
James Page, director of transportation for Putnam City Schools in Oklahoma, shared with STN following the keynote that he found the emergency plans for students with disabilities as his biggest takeaway.
“It was something that in the 20-plus years that I’ve been in school transportation that I’ve never thought about,” Page said. “It was eye-opening to see that. So as soon as I hit the ground Wednesday morning back at my district, that’s going to be one of the first things that I’m going to be working with my SPED department about. Sitting down and coming up with evacuation plans for our special education students.”
Gay also discussed the importance of transportation being involved in the student-parent reunification process and emergency planning. She recommended attendees engage in tabletop exercises, something that can be done on the school bus. For instance, ask students if the school bus was to catch fire right now, what would they do?
She noted it’s important to communicate with families and staff during crises, planning out how to speak with one another. She advised against one off, dramatic messaging for kids and instead recommended repeated, skill-based learning.
Overall, Gay advised attendees to start small and collaborate. Gather your team, introduce simple action words and icons, run low-stress practice, then expand it to scale, she said. Action checklists include forming a multi-disciplinary team (including transportation), inventory students’ access/functional needs, draft quick individual safety plans, practice tabletop scenarios on buses and standardize simple action-based messaging for each developmental level.
Britain may soon announce new EV mileage fees in this month’s budget.
EV drivers’ annual running costs could rise by about £240 under the plan.
They’ll still pay less than ICE owners spending roughly £600 on fuel duty.
Electric car owners in the UK may soon find their zero-emissions glow dimmed slightly by the Labour government. Chancellor Rachel Reeves is reportedly preparing a pay-per-mile tax for EVs to help plug the giant hole left by declining fuel duty receipts.
With more drivers ditching petrol pumps for charging cables, the Treasury suddenly finds itself missing billions in the “please drive somewhere so we can tax you for it” department.
The reported figure being floated? Around 3 pence ($0.04) per mile, which at 8,000 miles (12,900 km) a year would equate to a £240 ($315) bill. T
he government is expected to argue that while UK EV drivers might be disappointed by the new charge, they’ll still get a better deal than drivers of petrol and diesel-engined vehicles who pay around £600 ($784) per year in fuel duty.
But there’s no doubt the news first reported by The Daily Telegraph, if true – and these kinds of stories are usually leaked from within government – will be another blow to EV drivers, who from this year have been forced to pay the annual Vehicle Excise Duty previously only payable by petrol and diesel drivers.
Factor in that £195 ($255) annual VED bill, and an EV owner covering 8k miles a year could be asked to pay £435 more to drive their car in 2028, when the scheme is alleged to go live, than they did in 2024.
On the positive side, the new Labour government did introduce grants of up to £3,750 for buyers of new electric cars three years after the previous government axed the original scheme.
It’s not clear how such a scheme would be monitored; reports suggest that it would be up to drivers to volunteer their own mileage estimate figures for the coming year, rather than the government electronically tracking them. If they were later found to have driven more or fewer miles than estimated, they could either get a rebate or a bill.
EV drivers aren’t the only ones left dismayed by the still-unofficial news. The UK’s Society of Motor Manufacturers and Traders (SMMT) said it recognized the need for a rethink over vehicle taxation.
However, it described pay-per-mile as “entirely the wrong measure at the wrong time,” one that would end up “deterring consumers and further undermining industry’s ability to meet ZEV mandate targets, with significant ramifications for perceptions of the UK as a place to invest.”
Discover the new STN Transportation Director of the Year featured on our November issue cover. Other headlines include a NHTSA investigation after a driverless Waymo car illegally passed a stopped school bus and NTSB recommendations on seatbelts following a Texas school bus crash.
Frank Girardot, senior communications director for RIDE, discusses the electric school bus manufacturer’s School Bus Safety Week efforts.
Jennifer Gardella, director of transportation for Rockwall Independent School District in Texas and a 2025 STN Rising Star, discusses her childcare background, improving student relationships, training staff and receiving inspiration from fellow student transporters.
Login
