Riverside School District 96 board members expressed outrage last week over the likely decision of the Riverside village board to stop paying for school crossing guards at the end of the current school year.

"It's a public safety issue," said District 96 finance committee Chairman James Schraidt. "If government isn't there to protect public safety, especially for the most vulnerable, then what is it there for? I just think this is just a ridiculous way to cut the Riverside budget. I think it is deplorable."

But Riverside village trustees, facing an operating deficit of about $315,000 in 2010, reached a consensus at its October budget workshop to stop paying for school crossing guards when the current school years ends.

The Riverside village board will vote on its budget on Dec. 7, and Riverside Village President Michael Gorman said last week that he doesn't expect the village board to change its mind on the issue.

"I don't sense any desire to revisit the matter by the trustees," Gorman said.

Gorman said the decision to stop providing crossing guards is driven by the village's financial condition.

"The determinative factor is one thing, and one thing only, and that's our budget," Gorman said. "This decision is driven by Riverside's financial challenges."

It currently costs the village about $80,000 to pay for six crossing guards, two standby guards and equipment and time spent managing the program, Riverside Police Chief Thomas Weitzel said.

However, District 96 currently pays the village $17,000 to fund one crossing guard in front of Ames School, making the net cost to the village $63,000 according to Riverside Village Manager Peter Scalera.

In addition to Ames School, the Riverside police department currently provides crossing guards at the intersection of First and Forest avenues and along Longcommon Road at the railroad tracks, Forest Avenue, East Burlington Street and Nuttall Road.

Gorman said the village is happy to work with District 96, if the district takes over the responsibility for crossing guards. Scalera and Weitzel have already had one meeting with District 96 Superintendent Jonathan Lamberson on the issue.

"We've reached out to District 96 to assist them, if they want our assistance, in any transition they want to take place," Gorman said. "We are willing to work with them, if that is what they want, in assisting them in a transition."

However, school board members say it is not their responsibility to pay for school crossing guards, even though District 96 is projecting a budget surplus of about $1.7 million this year.

"That's the village's responsibility," said board member Jennifer Leimberer. "You're talking about train tracks and a major highway."

Currently, the village of Riverside pays for crossing guards in six locations during the morning, lunch time and when school lets out in the afternoon. Crossing guards generally work three hours a day and are paid $11.23 an hour, Weitzel said.

Managing the crossing guard program takes up a significant amount of time of a police sergeant, he said. When crossing guards are sick, sometimes police officers have to fill in, increasing the department's overtime costs.

However, school board members seemed adamant that paying for crossing guards should not be the district's responsibility.

"We're in the business of public education, we're not in the business of public safety," said board member Mary Ellen Meindl.

Village officials in Brookfield and North Riverside said that they plan to continue providing and paying school crossing guards for District 96 students.

North Riverside provides crossing guards at 26th Street and Westover Avenue, 31st Street and Desplaines Avenue and 26th Street and Desplaines Avenue. Brookfield provides two crossing guards near
Hollywood School.