CORRESPONDENCE - 25F - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA Date: February 13, 2015 To: Councilwoman Michele Martinez From: Bill Sadler, Southern California Regional Policy Manager, Safe Routes to School National Partnership RE: Crossing Guard Budget Cuts Total of 2 pages Dear Councilwoman Martinez: Thank you for asking for input on the proposed budget cuts and elimination of crossing guard positions in the City of Santa Ana. One of the five "E's" of Safe Routes to School is enforcement, and besides partnering with law enforcement, providing crossing guards is one of the most effective strategies to ensure safe walking and bicycling across intersections near schools.' Eliminating these positions jeopardizes the safety of schoolchildren and creates an environment where walking and bicycling are not encouraged. Crossing guards are a visible presence for drivers, letting them know to pay extra attention while traveling through an intersection where young children may be crossing the street. The presence of crossing guards also encourages more families to walk or bike to school, promoting physical activity and reducing congestion in the areas around schools. Crossing guards are also a form of preventive enforcement, protecting against potential safety hazards and other dangers near schools. It is important to have a system of safety to encourage walking and bicycling, and crossing guards are part of that system of safety. There is a need to understand the equity implications of this decision, as it can have unintended consequences that would affect communities of color or lower-income communities. The analysis does not indicate whether demographics or socioeconomic status were taken into account when making this decision. This decision could potentially regress the city to a point of being unsafe for pedestrians and bicyclists, especially in disadvantaged communities. With regard to the evaluation and "Warrant Sheet": 1.) Several warrant sheets recommended one crossing guard, but there were additional crossing guards assigned: we acknowledge that there may be overlap in the current system, but in many cases, a single crossing guard cannot manage the entire intersection when there are children traveling in multiple directions. 2.) Some crossing guards were in close proximity to others: as stated above, we acknowledge the redundancy of having multiple crossing guards near each other, but given that children travel in multiple directions to and from school, this may make sense in many of these locations. 1 Safe Routes to School, Five E's": httr)://saferoutespartnership.org/local/getting-started-locally/5es