Dispute Over Crossing Guards Rages Days Before School Starts for District 21

District 21 students in Buffalo Grove may not have crossing guards when they return to school Monday.

Buffalo Grove contends Community Consolidated School District 21 owes $24,191 to the village as part of a cost-sharing program for crossing-guard services in three locations:

• Arlington Heights Road and Bernard Drive, near Cooper Middle School and Longfellow School;
• Raupp Boulevard and Golfview Terrace, near Joyce Kilmer Elementary School;
• Anthony Road and Cambridge Drive, near Booth Takington Elementary School.

Meanwhile, the school district believes crossing guards are a matter of “public safety,” and, therefore, are the village’s responsibility exclusively, according to a June 28, 2015, letter from Patricia McAndrews, District 21 assistant superintendent for finance, to village manager Dane Bragg.

Upset District 21 parents have taken to Facebook to voice their concerns. The main issue for many parents is the nature of the dispute, its duration and how it is being handled now — just days before school begins.

“You are not committed to resolving this,” wrote one parent on the District 21 Facebook page. “You have known about this for two years and you just notified the district now. Shame on you. Take ownership for your actions.”

The village first reached out to the school district in 2013 regarding its intent to start a cost-sharing program, village manager Dane Bragg told Patch. Until the 2013-14 school year, the village paid 100 percent of the cost for crossing guards, Bragg said. Since then, the village has reached out to the school district on several occasions but had not heard back.

“The first official communication was this year,” said Bragg, who added the district sent an e-mail and then a written response. “In both pieces, they told us they wanted to continue the program but they didn’t want to pay for it.”

Kara Beach, communications specialist for District 21, said the school district and village had several informal conversations but no formal decision had been reached on who was covering the cost of the crossing guards. While the school district had received the village’s bills, it was not an amount they had agreed upon, she said.

“It would be like if I sent my Visa bill to my neighbor and assumed they would pay for it,” Beach said.

Since an “intergovernmental agreement” was never reached, the school district, Beach said, was surprised when they learned the village would be eliminating crossing guards for the upcoming school year. She said the village has paid for crossing guards for the past 30 to 40 years.

“There have been a number of verbal conversations,” she said. “I think that we were trying to understand them and why there was such a departure from this practice. But it was never brought to the board level.”

Under the proposed cost-sharing program, Bragg said the school district would cover about 50 percent of the crossing guards’ paychecks. The village would still cover Social Security and Medicare, protective gear and training costs, which means the village actually covers about two-thirds of the total annual cost and the school district is responsible for the remaining one-third, Bragg said.

Districts 97 and 102, which also serve parts of Buffalo Grove, are on board with the same cost-sharing program, Bragg said. On the flip side, Beech said the village of Wheeling pays for the eight crossing guards that serve District 21 schools.

Meanwhile, District 21 officials insist school district tax dollars should not pay for public safety initiatives, such as crossing guards. In a June 5 letter to Bragg, McAndrews wrote:

“As a school district we are committed to public safety, however, remain concerned that the cost-sharing program proposed is unfair to our taxpayers as dollars collected for education would be redirected to cover the cost of public safety for one community. It is our belief that other public entities do not supplement our costs for education nor should we be asked to supplement the cost of public safety.”

While the village billed the school district, “a contract for these services was never agreed upon by either Board,” District 21 wrote on its Facebook page.

“District 21 continues to honor the long-standing practice where each village/city provides for the public safety of the community, including the cost of crossing guards,” according to the Facebook post.

The issue came to a head this past week when the school district posted the following message on its website:

“Recently, the Village of Buffalo Grove decided to remove crossing guards from three intersections near our schools. …. Historically, the Village of Buffalo Grove has provided crossing guards, following best practices of our neighboring Villages including Wheeling and Arlington Heights. These Villages have conducted traffic studies, determined needs and provided crossing guards to ensure the safety of community members. In correspondence from the Village of Buffalo Grove received on August 12, District 21 was notified of the Village’s intent to discontinue this service for the 2015-2016 school year.”

The village of Buffalo Grove fired back with a message on its website:

“Community Consolidated School District 21 recently published an erroneous statement on its web site and through its social media channels, claiming that the Village of Buffalo Grove decided to remove crossing guards from three intersections … . In fact, the Village of Buffalo Grove has suspended District 21’s crossing guard program due to non-payment for services rendered to the District.”

The village included the letters, dating back to 2013, between the school district and village in the Wednesday message posted to its website. Bragg said District 21 made it seem, in its messaging this past week, that there hadn’t been an ongoing communication between the village and school district.

“I think they positioned it to say that there wasn’t much communication that occurred and the evidence shows to the contrary,” Bragg said.

Regardless, Bragg said, the village is eager to come to an agreement with the school district so crossing guards will be at the three intersections on Monday. The village sent an e-mail to the school district this morning proposing five solutions to the issue.

Those solutions are:

1. The school district pays its balance of $24,191. If the past due balance is paid, crossing guards would be reinstated immediately.
2. The school district hire an off-duty police officer at a rate of $71 per hour.
3. The school district contracts a private firm for crossing guard services (the village provided some suggestions for private firms).
4. The school district reaches out to parents, including PTO members, to engage volunteer crossing guards. The village would absorb the cost of training and equipment for those volunteers.
5. Set up an interest-free payment plan with the village.

Bragg said he hopes the issue will be resolved.

“We are actively trying to find solution to help the district out,” Bragg said. “We are very committed to the safety of the children within District 21.”

Beach could not detail what the next steps for the school district would be or if the school district was on board with any of the village’s five solutions. The District 21 Board of Education is scheduled to meet Thursday night.

“We are continuing the conversation,” Beach said.

Stay connected to your community on the Lake County Patch Facebook pages:

Grayslake - Libertyville - Buffalo Grove - Vernon Hills - Barrington - Lake Zurich