Meeting: City Council

Meeting Time: August 27, 2024 at 6:00pm PDT
The online Comment window has expired

Agenda Item

2. PUBLIC COMMENTS At this time, members of the public may address the Council on matters not listed on the agenda within the subject matter jurisdiction of the City Council, provided that NO action may be taken on off-agenda items unless authorized by law. Public Comments are limited to three (3) minutes per speaker unless a different time limit is announced.

  • Default_avatar
    Guest User 3 months ago

    I highly oppose the fact that the city is letting all school crossing guards go. Our most vulnerable community member are being put in danger.

  • Default_avatar
    Guest User 3 months ago

    School crossing guards are critical for the safety of small children and their parents. Besides protecting pedestrians, they also keep traffic flowing, providing breaks for traffic to proceed. No other city requires a school district to pay for their crossing guards. The school district has no jurisdiction over where crosswalks are painted or the liability insurance for paying for guards. If the rationale for raises is for providing staff and resources for public safety, then crossing guards should be included in that financial outlay. Daily crossing guards are much more essential than an annual Treats in the Streets, an event that could be modified to require a much smaller budget, leaving additional money available for crossing guards Thank you. Bonnie Robinson

  • Default_avatar
    Guest User 3 months ago

    I oppose using money for activities rather than for school crossing guards. If it is too late, then use all possible resources to pay off debts. Thank you.

  • Default_avatar
    Guest User 3 months ago

    I strongly urge you to reconsider having no crossing guards for our schools. It is a reckless decision that puts children at risk. Our citizens deserve to feel safe sending their children to school, and it is your responsibility to ensure that happens. Our school staff and teachers are already overworked, and this adds another level of stress to their jobs. They should not have to worry about how their students are getting to school, but I know they will. It is your responsibility to ensure the safety of Orange residents. If you are going to make this cut and still receive raises in your salary, you personally should be held responsible. You should do the crossing guard job to earn that raise or forgo your increase to fund their job. Crossing guards are all part-time employees that cost you pennies. They don't even get benefits to risk their lives for our children. The same can not be said for you.

  • Default_avatar
    Guest User 3 months ago

    How dare you cancel crossing guards and then give raises. The students of Orange deserve better. Or is it that your children attend private school and you couldn’t care any less. To put that responsibility on schools who already have enough to do instead of taking care of our children on the STREETS of Orange is reckless and irresponsible. I’m begging you to put this money back where it belongs to protect our CHILDREN.

  • Default_avatar
    Guest User 3 months ago

    I oppose of the crossing guards being let go. Not only is, this a safety issues but a public issue. The role of government officials is for THE people to protect THE people. If this is a budget issue we need to know how we allocate our tax dollars. Using tax’s dollars to increase the salary for city officials rather then continue to fund our cross guards. We then allow children to walk home in high impacted Main Streets. We create a scares within our city and put in danger of the children of Orange.

  • Default_avatar
    Guest User 3 months ago

    Dear Orange City Council,

    As an Orange resident and OUSD parent, I strongly ask you to reconsider cutting crossing guards at our public schools. The safety of our students should be the number one priority when deciding a city’s budget. I find it embarrassing for the City of Orange that we can’t figure out how to fund this essential program. To put the responsibility on the school district and/or community members when other OC districts do not have this responsibility and these are city streets is completely unreasonable.

    Crossing guards are not only beneficial to public school children, they assist with the flow of traffic and help motorists drive through high traffic areas in a safe manner. They benefit ALL Orange residents. If our city doesn’t have the funds to keep this imperative program in effect, then we are failing our community.

  • Default_avatar
    Guest User 3 months ago

    We want crossing guards back on La Veta because this spot is incredibly dangerous!

  • Default_avatar
    Guest User 3 months ago

    I highly oppose the fact that the city is letting all crossing guards go. I realize we are in financial trouble but not at the cost of safety. Our little ones will be in protected. Take away Sweets for Treats or something that doesn’t affect the lives and safety of our kids. Teachers will not be doing this duty for you because it would be a personal liability. Please reconsider!!!

  • Default_avatar
    Guest User 3 months ago

    Hi, I'm writing in support of the housing development proposal in the city of Orange. I'm in support of ANY housing that gets built in our city, in ANY location, anything to help alleviate the severe housing crisis which will make it impossible for our children to be able to afford to live near their parents in their old age. It's such short sightedness of CA cities to not understand the massive implications (San Francisco level housing prices) of not keeping up with the demand for housing via building more homes. Thank you, a resident of Orange

  • Default_avatar
    Guest User 3 months ago

    crossing Guards.
    OUSD protects children in the areas they are equipped to do so. This is not their job. This is a city function.
    OUSD doesn’t have liability insurance for this. It’s simply not done.
    I understand our city has significant budget problems and tough decisions must be made however, I am writing to express my strong opposition to the cutting of the crossing guard program for the Orange Unified School District. Shifting this responsibility to OUSD is both impractical and unfair for several reasons.
    We need crossguards at our schools are you waiting for an accident to happen to make it a priority

  • Default_avatar
    Guest User 3 months ago

    OUSD should not be required to assume financial and management responsibility for school crossing guards. No other district in Orange County is required to do so. Crossing guards work on city streets where districts have no responsibility for speed limits, police patrols, crosswalk locations, warning signals or other signage. Asking OUSD to provide guards doesn't make sense and drains funds needed to improve the learning environment and safety of our students while they are on district property.

    I live next door to an OUSD elementary school, within sight of a previously guarded crosswalk. It was sad and scary to see the crossing unmaned when school started yesterday. The safety of children on their way to school should be a budget item of highest priority, not one to tossed when times are tough!

  • Default_avatar
    Guest User 3 months ago

    Mayor Slater and Council Members,

    I am a resident and the parent of a current OUSD student.

    I understand our city has significant budget problems and tough decisions must be made however, I am writing to express my strong opposition to the cutting of the crossing guard program for the Orange Unified School District. Shifting this responsibility to OUSD is both impractical and unfair for several reasons.

    Ensuring the safety of children at intersections falls under city jurisdiction, not a school district’s. OUSD is tasked with educating and protecting students within the school environment, but managing crossing guards is a city function.

    OUSD does not have liability insurance for crossing guard duties, which is not a responsibility typically covered by school districts. Transferring this task to OUSD would expose the district to significant legal and financial risks.

    Suggesting teachers and principals to take on crossing guard responsibilities is unreasonable given their already demanding educational duties. The Orange Police Department (OPD), with their specialized training, would be a more suitable entity for this role. Why isn't OPD being asked to contribute in this capacity? Their budget wasn't cut and they had plenty of officers available to chase down missing political yard signs in the last election. Wasn't the reason for not cutting OPD’s budget because of community safety concerns?

    Why should OUSD be unfairly burdened with costs that other districts in Orange County do not have to bear? The inequity of requiring OUSD to fund its own crossing guards, while other districts do not, creates an unjust situation.

    Since OUSD does not control street conditions, speed limits, or traffic signals, it makes little sense to ask the district to manage areas where they lack decision-making power and influence.

    Implementing a new crossing guard program would require nearly a year to recruit, train, and deploy staff. Outsourcing this service would be prohibitively expensive, with costs potentially reaching around a million dollars annually. Over a decade, this would divert resources that could otherwise be used to modernize an elementary school.

    The financial strain of covering crossing guard duties could equal the cost of modernizing an elementary school every five years. This significant expense would directly impact the quality of education provided to OUSD students.

    Budget cuts should not come at the expense of children’s safety. It is crucial that public safety considerations include the well-being of students who rely on crossing guards for protection.

    OUSD’s prudent financial management does not mean they should bear the city’s budgetary shortfall at the expense of our students’ safety and educational resources. I urge the City Council to reconsider this decision and ensure that the responsibility for crossing guards remains with the city, where it belongs.

    Thank you for your attention to this important issue.

    Sincerely, 
Kim VanDerHoek

  • Default_avatar
    Guest User 3 months ago

    I am in opposition of the city cutting all crossing guards near school areas. It is unsafe and frankly irresponsible. It may seem to make sense to save a few hundred thousand dollars by cutting crossing guards, but think of how much more costly the lives of children are and possible lawsuits if anyone gets hurt- which is simply a matter of time when pedestrians are mostly children in highly trafficked school areas. Any parent, passerby or community member can attest to how risky this move is. Please do the responsible and ethical thing.

  • Default_avatar
    Guest User 3 months ago

    Please bring back crossing people the cars are fast and scary. I am worried for my siblings that they will get ran over because people are bad at driving

  • Default_avatar
    Guest User 3 months ago

    Making the decision to not use Crossing Guards is NOT a part of "smart city management". Frankly, this is a joke from this City Council and the Mayor. I am looking at Homes where homeowners have paid pennies in taxes for the last 40yrs and now are listed on Zillow for millions (I wonder which Real Estate council members benefit from high housing prices? Do you represent your wealthy donors or the thousands upon thousands of families with children in the district?) Orange Unified School District should not be responsible for this inability to collect the appropriate amount to run a city and its schools. Do the hard thing, tell your rich buddies we need a functioning city, and collect the revenue to make our streets safe for children. If someone gets hurt by this the CITY will be paying out the lawsuit money! Signed, a constituent with THREE children in OUSD schools!

  • Default_avatar
    Guest User 3 months ago

    We need crossguards at our schools are you waiting for an accident to happen to make it a priority

  • Default_avatar
    Guest User 3 months ago

    Children are a precious commodity. If you don't prioritize your children, nothing else really matters. If you don't provide the crossing guards, and a child is hit or killed, you will carry that on your conscience the rest of your lives. There are so many things you can cut (think Halloween). I know you'll do what's in the best interest of the children.

  • Default_avatar
    Guest User 3 months ago

    Mayor Slater and Council,

    People move to a city because they like the city's services and the schools! You take away services that make schools safe, you will end up with people deciding not to move to Orange, thus affecting the cities real estate and taxes! Older people in the community will not like having to sell their properties at a discount. Plus all the other stuff below!!
    Karen Goldberg

    OUSD protects children in the areas they are equipped to do so. This is not their job. This is a city function.

    OUSD doesn’t have liability insurance for this. It’s simply not done.

    Teachers/principals cannot be expected to take on this task in addition to their other duties at the same time. Why isn’t anyone asking OPD to “volunteer”??? this aligns much more with their training…

    Every other district in Orange County doesn’t have to pay for the crossing guards

    OUSD doesn’t get to decide the speed limit, crosswalk layout, painting, lighting, stopsign or signal installation, etc. Why would they monitor someone else’s area?

    Pedestrians are not the only ones protected. Crossing guards also keep traffic flowing and provide a central point for when cars should proceed (or not)

    OUSD providing this service would be

    It would take the district the better part of a year to create a recruiting process, find crossing guards, train and get them ready to be out there making sure pedestrians are safe. If we were to outsource this the estimated cost would be a million dollars a year. So over the decade we could choose to modernize an elementary school OR hire crossing guards in one of the seven cities we exist within.

    OUSD doesn’t need to be the ONLY school district in Orange County paying to monitor city streets.

    It doesn’t make any sense. OUSD isn’t responsible for street conditions, they don’t set the speed limit, control police patrols, determine who gets a light or a stop-sign. Because that’s the duty of the city.

    This doesn’t only impact students who attend schools within the city. If OUSD has to pay for crossing guards the financial impact will be significant. The equivalent of one elementary school modernization will be spent every 5 years.

    City of Orange has to make cuts to balance their budget, why are you leaving kids out of your public safety analysis?

    I am a parent
    Because OUSD has been prudent with our funds and dealt with pension funding in a timely manner, doesn’t mean we owe the city of Orange to help them out of their budgetary crisis to the financial and educational detriment of all OUSD students.

  • Default_avatar
    Guest User 3 months ago

    Mayor Slater and Council,

    I appreciate the difficulty of where/how to make budget cuts and to increase revenue. I recently spoke at your meeting favoring a small tax increase to improve the revenue side of the equation. I am very bothered by the prospect of moving crossing guards to OUSD since Orange will be unique in the county with that expectation. School staff has more than enough to do to teach and attend to the kids. I am not a parent, but frequently drive by Taft School on Cambridge and see the already existing traffic congestion. The crossing guards are essential to keeping kids safe and traffic moving. Thank you for your reconsideration.

    Sister Mary Sweeney