Cathy Baylock | School Crossing Guards

The History:

In February, I attended my first meeting as a newly appointed member of the City/school Liaison Committee. This group includes two school board members, two council members and two members each from school and city staff. I attended alone as councilman Mike Coffey had a schedule conflict.

At the meeting, we discussed the police chief’s proposed budget cuts that affected the school district. These included a proposal to reduce the funding for one-half of the city paid crossing guards at a savings of $32,000 in the first tier of cuts and, the school liaison police officer in the second tier (approximately $130,000).

Following this meeting (and before the next regularly scheduled council meeting where I would have reported on the outcome of this meeting), the council held a Saturday budget study session to take a first pass at proposed cuts. Though all of the proposed cuts are painful, I stated the only cut that I could not support was cutting the proposed $32,000 for crossing guards. At that point, councilman Galligan suggested we cut all of the crossing guards or $64,000. In response, Terry Nagel and I suggested that we cut $22,000 from the city’s website budget to free up additional funding. Councilman Galligan then suggested that we restore the proposed $25,000 reduction of community funding for outside groups as recommended by staff. This category includes such organziations as Friends for Youth (in Redwood City) Peninsula Civic Light Opera, the Legal Aid Society, et al. which benefit Burlingame in some ways. Many of these groups operate outside our city.

One must remember at this point that this is a budget in process. No vote has been taken and will not be taken until the budget is finalized in June.

Consequently, when the news of the complete elimination of school crossing guards reached the community, the uproar was swift and deafening. Prudently, Mayor Rosalie O’Mahony called for an emergency school/city liaison meeting, which she attended on councilman Coffey’s behalf. During the meeting, which started on a strained note, the group (which included Mayor O’Mahony and myself) expressed its hope that we could find a potential solution to the problem as was stated in a press release issued by Sonny DaMarto (read Dr. DaMarto’s Press Release). The group spent two hours discussing ways to fund the guards including, but not limited to raising recreation fees for city classes held at school sites, taking funding from the tier 2 cut planned for the community policing officer, parcel taxes, etc. (see meeting minutes). We left the meeting hoping for a positive outcome and this is what I communicated to the community.

In April I attended, again as the sole City Council representative, a third Liaison Committee meeting during which I requested that the school district come up with a meaningful contribution towards funding the guards. At the end of the meeting, Superintendent DaMarto pledged to go back to the full school board and request $32,000 in funding. This was approved at their board’s regularly scheduled meeting on April 27, 2004.

During the next Monday night council meeting (May 4th) a large group of parents and schoolchildren spoke during the public comment period against the proposed cuts. This led to an unfounded accusation from Vice Mayor Joe Galligan that he “does not think the Council majority is being represented” on the joint City-School Liaison Committee since “we have given direction and we end up having an onslaught of people tonight who have come to the meeting, (who) were set up by Cathy and Joe Baylock to come beat us up publicly”. (Burlingame Daily News, 5-6-04). He further went on to state in the next day’s Daily News that “Councilwoman Baylock needs some schooling on how to conduct herself as an elected official”.

Vice Mayor Galligan’s statements are sadly inaccurate and inflammatory. As the record shows, I have represented the interests of the Council and the community that I serve in good faith throughout this process. My efforts culminated in the School District’s agreeing to contribute one-half of the $64,000 needed to fund crossing guards. No formal vote has been taken on the budget and it remains a proposal until the budget’s final adoption by the full council.

I believe at this point it is time to get beyond the unproductive and irrational finger pointing and work on a constructive solution to this very important matter.

A proposed solution:

We have accumulated $30,000 in a fund relegated to pay for a celebration during our city’s centennial which will take place in 2008. An additional $5,000 has been designated in the upcoming budget to fund this event. I believe it would serve the best interests of our entire community to use this funding for the safety of our school children. A commitment could be made that this is simply a “loan” and that when our financial recovery is in sight, that the funds would be restored for this community event.

No one supports celebrating our City’s history more than I do, but I strongly believe the community values the day-to-day safety of its children over a proposed celebration that will take place several years from now.

We could also reduce funding for some out-of-town charity groups or appeal to the Transit Authority for Measure A funding as is being proposed by Foster City’s mayor. I welcome other ideas from the community.

Council School Liaison Committee Minutes

Minutes of the City/District Liaison Meeting Re: School Crossing Guards 3/5/04

» Learn more