Legislation Details

File #: 26-0520    Name:
Type: Discussion Items Status: Agenda Ready
File created: 4/20/2026 In control: City Council
On agenda: 5/5/2026 Final action:
Title: DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION ON PROPOSED MODIFICATIONS TO THE CITY'S CROSSING GUARD PROGRAM
Attachments: 1. Administrative Report, 2. Map of Current Crossing Guard Locations, 3. Map of Proposed Crossing Guard Locations DRAFT, 4. N1 - blue folder, 5. N1 CC Presentation
Date Action ByActionResultAction DetailsMeeting DetailsVideo
No records to display.

 

To:                                                               MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL

From:                                                               JANE CHUNG, ASSISTANT TO THE CITY MANAGER

 

TITLE

title    

DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION ON PROPOSED MODIFICATIONS TO THE CITY’S CROSSING GUARD PROGRAM

end

 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The School Crossing Guard Subcommittee (Subcommittee) has met several times over the past few months to evaluate and develop modifications to the City’s Crossing Guard Program.  The recommended changes, if approved by the City Council as outlined below, would take effect with the beginning of the 2026-27 school year and implement an equitable, data driven, and more sustainably staffed Crossing Guard Program. 

 

BACKGROUND

The City’s Crossing Guard Program currently consists of 27 crossing guard locations, of which 22 are staffed by part-time City employed crossing guards, while the remaining five locations are staffed through contract services provided by All City Management Services, Inc.  In FY 2025-26, the Police Department’s core operating budget included $212,600 for part-time personnel, providing coverage at 12 crossing guard locations.  The City Council also approved a one-time General Fund appropriation of $340,000 for 10 additional locations, covered by part-time employees at a cost of $201,842, and five additional locations, covered by a contract service provider at a cost of $138,158.  This funding brought the total number of staffed crossing guard locations to 27 and increased the total General Fund cost of the crossing guard program to $552,600.  The annual cost for a single City employed crossing guard is approximately $18,954, compared to an estimated $27,631 for a single contracted crossing guard.

 

Unfortunately, the City is facing significant budget challenges in Fiscal Year 2026-27 and continues to have difficulty hiring and retaining personnel to cover the 22 employee staffed crossing guard locations.  The City currently employs a roster of 24 part-time crossing guards, however at any given time several of the City’s employee staffed locations are temporarily vacated due to personal leave or scheduled vacation.  As such, the City needs to maintain a roster of several more part time employees than covered spots.    

 

In the event that there is not a standby part time crossing guard available to cover an absence, the Police Department must assign a full-time employee and take that employee away from their normal duties.  Between August 2025 and April 2026, there were approximately 675 call-outs, with six to eight call-outs in a single afternoon being common.  These staffing shortages place substantial strain on the Police Department.  Initial crossing guard vacancies are filled by Municipal Services Officers, diverting them from their primary responsibilities, such as parking and street sweeping enforcement.  Additionally, due to the volume of vacancies, Code Enforcement personnel and sworn Police Officers have also been frequently reassigned to staff crossing guard locations.  The City’s anticipated staffing roster for the 2026-27 school year is not sufficient to cover the 22 City employee covered locations in 2025-26.

 

Concurrently, the reliance on contract services has become increasingly difficult and costly.  Contract rates have risen every year, with each contracted location costing the City approximately $8,000 more per location than in prior years.  In addition, the City has encountered disputed contract terms that further complicate the City’s ability to rely on contract services.  The persistent staffing shortages, high call out rates, and rising contract expenses demonstrate that the previous budget appropriation is not sustainable and would place substantial and ongoing pressure on the City’s General Fund without addressing the underlying challenges in staffing the City’s Crossing Guard Program. 

 

To ensure the City’s limited resources are allocated effectively and equitably, the Subcommittee applied a data-driven approach for determining future crossing guard placements.  Following a comprehensive evaluation of each location, the Subcommittee is recommending the following changes to the City’s Crossing Guard Program:

 

                     Maintain at least 1 crossing guard for each school

                     Keep or relocate crossing guard(s) to locations with high traffic/need

                     Invest in tactical calming measures and visibility code compliance at locations where a crossing guard is recommended to be removed or relocated

 

With these adjustments, the Subcommittee proposes to reduce the total number of crossing guard locations from 27 to 18.  The table below outlines the specific changes to the program by school site:

 

School Site

Current Crossing Guard Location(s)

Proposed Change(s)

Proposed Crossing Guard Location(s)

Alta Vista

1. Prospect & Camino Real  2. Julia & Knob Hill  3. Julia & Serpentine  Prospect & Knob Hill

Remove (2) Julia & Serpentine Prospect & Knob Hill

1. Prospect & Camino Real  Julia & Knob Hill

Beryl Heights

4. Beryl & Prospect  Beryl & Maria

Remove (1)   Beryl & Prospect

Beryl & Maria

Birney

5. Grant & Aviation  Grant & Green

No changes

2. Grant & Aviation  Grant & Green

Jefferson

6. Flagler & Havemeyer  7. Flagler & Morgan  8. Harkness & Carlson  Harkness & Morgan

Relocate Flagler & Morgan to Ford & Aviation    Remove (2) Harkness & Carlson Harkness & Morgan

3. Flagler & Havemeyer Ford & Aviation 

Lincoln

9. Rindge & Plant  Robinson & Vail

Relocate Robinson & Vail to Artesia & Bike Path

4. Rindge & Plant  Artesia & Bike Path

Madison

Mackay & Nelson

No changes

Mackay & Nelson

Parras

10. Emerald & Lucia  Vincent & Lucia

Remove (1) Vincent & Lucia

Emerald & Lucia

St Lawrence

Prospect & Ave G

Remove (1) Prospect & Ave G

 

Tulita

11. Palos Verdes Blvd & Helberta  12. Prospect & Helberta  Prospect & Palos Verdes Blvd

Remove (1)   Prospect & Palos Verdes Blvd

5. Palos Verdes Blvd & Helberta  6. Prospect & Helberta 

Washington & Adams

13. Inglewood & 182nd  14. Grant & Felton  15. Inglewood & Ralston  16. Ralston & Lilienthal  17. Ripley & Felton  Ripley & Lilienthal

Remove (1) Ralston & Lilienthal

7. Inglewood & 182nd  8. Grant & Felton  9. Inglewood & Ralston  10. Ripley & Felton  Ripley & Lilienthal

Total Locations

27

(9)

18

 

At locations where crossing guard locations are proposed for removal, the City would evaluate and consider installing traffic calming measures such as striped curb extensions with or without flexible bollards, or similar tactical school-time curb extensions using cones, subject to staff availability.  Where feasible, these measures would help to reduce vehicle speeds, lower turning speeds, shorten pedestrian crossing distances, and enhance visibility and overall safety.  In addition, City staff would perform targeted enforcement of existing corner-lot hedge height limits under the Redondo Beach Municipal Code to address and reduce visibility obstructions near intersections.  If these measures prove to be successful, the City may consider permanent curb extensions and additional school area traffic safety improvements using funding from a recently awarded Metro Measure M grant.

 

The Subcommittee presented the proposed modifications at the Redondo Beach Unified School District’s monthly principals’ convening on April 23, 2026.  The goals of the presentation were to engage principals collaboratively, explain the proposed modifications, solicit their feedback, and initiate a joint discussion to develop a communications plan that reflects a shared partnership among the principals, the School District, and the City.

 

If the City Council approves the proposed recommendations as recommended by the Subcommittee, the fiscal impact would be an estimated annual savings of $174,600.  The table below provides a breakdown of the fiscal impact:

 

Current Crossing Guard ProgramFY 2025-26 BudgetProposed ModificationsProposed Budget

 

 

 

12 part time personnel (ongoing)

$212,600

18 part time personnel (ongoing)

$378,000

10 part time personnel (one-time)

$201,842

 

 

5 contract personnel

$138,158

Remove

-

Total

$552,600

 

$378,000

 

If the proposed modifications are approved, staff also recommends increasing the Police Department’s operating budget to fully fund part time personnel to staff the 18 crossing guard locations.  This change would reduce dependence on one-time appropriations and help stabilize program funding moving forward.

 

COORDINATION

The School Crossing Guard Subcommittee (including Councilmembers Behrendt and Kaluderovic, Assistant to the City Manager Jane Chung, Traffic Engineer Ryan Liu, and Police Captain Brian Long) engaged with the Redondo Beach Unified School District and received input from several principals regarding the proposed modifications.  The City Manager’s Office coordinated with the City’s Traffic Engineer and Police Department in the preparation of this report.

 

FISCAL IMPACT

Reducing the total number of crossing guard locations from 27 to 18 would result in an estimated annual savings of $174,600.


APPROVED BY:

Mike Witzansky, City Manager

ATTACHMENTS

                     Map - Current Crossing Guard Locations

                     Map - Proposed Crossing Guard Locations