Manhattan Beach Logo
File #: 20-0306    Version: 1
Type: Consent - Staff Report Status: Agenda Ready
In control: City Council Regular Meeting
On agenda: 11/17/2020 Final action:
Title: Consideration of a Resolution Amending the Agreement with All City Management Services for Crossing Guard Services to Extend the Term of the Agreement by Two Years at an Estimated Annual Cost of $300,000 (Police Chief Abell). ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 20-0132
Attachments: 1. Resolution No. 20-0132, 2. Amendment No.1 - Crossing Guard Services

TO:

Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council

 

THROUGH:

Bruce Moe, City Manager

 

FROM:

Derrick Abell, Chief of Police

Andy Harrod, Police Lieutenant

Julie Dahlgren, Senior Management Analyst

 

SUBJECT:Title

Consideration of a Resolution Amending the Agreement with All City Management Services for Crossing Guard Services to Extend the Term of the Agreement by Two Years at an Estimated Annual Cost of $300,000 (Police Chief Abell).

ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 20-0132

Line

_________________________________________________________

Recommended Action

RECOMMENDATION:

Staff recommends that the City Council adopt Resolution No. 20-0132 amending the Agreement with All City Management Services to exercise the two optional extension years for crossing guard services at an estimated annual cost of $300,000.

Body

FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:

Sufficient funds are budgeted in the Fiscal Year 2020-2021 Police Department’s budget. Future years will be budgeted accordingly for this service.

 

BACKGROUND:

The City’s Crossing Guard Program was introduced in the mid 1980’s. School crossing guards are provided at 26 locations to assist school children safely through intersections during school hours. Up until 2007, the Crossing Guard Program was operated in-house (staffed by part-time City employees and overseen by the Police Department’s Traffic Sergeant). The direct cost of the in-house program in 2007 was $204,775 (excluding full-time staff time for program management, scheduling, recruiting, conducting background investigations, hiring and payroll). As a City-run program, the City was also responsible for all liability issues, including Workers Compensation claims, which over a ten-year period cost an average of $12,900 per year.

 

Staff analyzed the program and determined that contracting the crossing guard services to a third-party would be a more efficient means of operating the program.  In July 2007, All City Management Services was selected to provide crossing guard services to the City of Manhattan Beach.  This enhanced the Police Department’s delivery of service by ensuring that the crossing guard positions were always fully staffed and eliminating the diversion of Police Department staff to backfill crossing guard vacancies and absences.  It also eliminates the crossing guard Workers Compensation claims and reduces the liability associated with the operation of the Crossing Guard Program.  

 

DISCUSSION:

All City Management Services has provided reliable and professional crossing guard services to the City of Manhattan Beach since 2007, and continues to be the largest provider of school crossing guard services in the area.  They employ over 3,500 guards and serve over 150 agencies. 

 

In July 2017, they were again awarded a contract through a competitive bid process. The three-year contract included the option for two extension years.

 

Staff recommends that the City Council approve the Amendment exercising the optional two extension years.  This recommendation is based on the excellent service All City Management Services has provided to the City over many years, 30 years of crossing guard management experience, and site-specific knowledge. If at any time the City is not satisfied with All City Management’s services, it may terminate the contract with a thirty-day written notice.

 

It is important to note that the City is charged for crossing guard services under this contract only when such services are provided. As a result, during the pandemic, when school classes were not being held, and crossing guards were not needed, no charges were incurred.

 

PUBLIC INTEREST:
After analysis, staff determined that public outreach was not required for this issue.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The City has reviewed the proposed activity for compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and has determined that the activity is not a “Project” as defined under Section 15378 of the State CEQA Guidelines; therefore, pursuant to Section 15060(c)(3) of the State CEQA Guidelines the activity is not subject to CEQA. Thus, no environmental review is necessary.

LEGAL REVIEW
The City Attorney has reviewed the Amendment and has approved it as-to-form.

 

Attachment:
1.  Resolution No. 20-0132

2.  Amendment No. 1 - Crossing Guard Services