Palo Alto poised to restore crossing guard funding after public uproar 

Despite ongoing budget challenges, Palo Alto is preparing to restore some of the funding it was planning to cut from the city’s crossing guard program and ask the school district to help pay for the popular service, according to a recommendation the City Council Finance Committee approved May 19.

As part of its final hearing before the revised budget goes to the full council, the finance committee also recommended finding creative ways to incentivize hiring in the Palo Alto Police Department and adding a council administrative assistant.

Councilmembers George Lu, Pat Burt and Ed Lauing — who sit on the committee — focused extensively on rebalancing the budget given additional feedback from the council and residents, who urged the city to find ways to finance additional projects and positions such as crossing guards and transportation staff. The crossing guards, which were proposed to be cut by 10%, was an item that caused significant outcry from the community who feel the guards are necessary to ensure children can get to school safely.

Under the revised budget, the city will continue to fund 50% of the crossing guards that were slated to be cut, contingent upon the Palo Alto Unified School District footing the rest of the bill. If that doesn’t happen, the council will need to revisit the item during the midyear budget review in February next year.

Given the resounding opposition to the cuts by the council and residents, the finance committee spent little time at the meeting discussing it further.

The hearing gave the committee its first chance to review the proposed $1 billion budget since the full council weighed in on it. The budget proposed by City Manager Ed Shikada in April includes a $311 million general fund, which pays for most services not related to utilities. Earlier this month, the finance committee held two meetings to review the budget of every department.

Split on administrative help

While the committee was on the same page when it came to restoring funding for crossing guards, the one item that did cause a split was the addition of a council administrative assistant role. This is set to be financed through fiscal year 2026 council contingency funds, and the position will help councilmembers organize schedules and plan trips related to city business. However, the position is also envisioned as a pilot program that would sunset in December, and the committee considered extending it to the midyear budget review in February with the addition of $15,000.

Burt came out staunchly against the idea of an administrative assistant, especially because it uses council contingency funds that are historically spent on community events. The position is being added at a time when the city is facing a budget gap of about $17 million, which the city plans to close through a combination of service cuts, elimination of vacant positions and reductions in capital expenditures.

“This is for the council to serve themselves,” Burt said. “I think it’s a complete break from the principle of (contingency funds). … I wouldn’t want to answer to the voters to justify that.”

Lauing was more supportive of the idea as a pilot, but said he was comfortable sunsetting it in December and from there evaluating its successes. Lu seemed similarly ambivalent toward the idea, noting that many artificial intelligence tools can accomplish the same scheduling and organizational tasks that an assistant would otherwise perform.

Their reservations notwithstanding, Lauing and Lu both voted to recommend the council approve the addition of the assistant position, while Burt opposed it.

Trimming expenses

The administrative assistant was not the only area where committee members found themselves debating the merits of the program at a time when the city is looking to cut about $7 million from its general fund. The budget Shikada proposed last month would also trim expenses for tree protection.

The city works with the nonprofit Canopy to preserve and maintain its urban trees, and this contract was scheduled for about a 10% cut in fiscal year 2027, amounting to about $43,000.

“It feels less ideal for staff if we’re cutting a staff position but not touching the equivalent Canopy contract at all,” Lu said.

JP Renaud, Canopy’s executive director, urged the committee to minimize the cuts. He emphasized that while some aspects of the program may not seem as necessary, such as digital tree health monitoring, the cuts would “reverberate throughout our organization.”