LA DOT adopts data-driven crossing guard deployment; volunteer program left to LAUSD

The Los Angeles Department of Transportation (LADOT) presented a revised, data-driven methodology for assigning school crossing guards and the Transportation Committee approved LADOT's recommendations and asked for additional report backs before the 2025–26 school year.

LADOT Assistant General Manager Tom Carranza told the committee the new approach “prioritizes the highest need schools” by expanding an existing school-safety ranking to include intersection control, prevailing vehicle speeds, pedestrian volumes and turning movements. The department said it would sort prioritized elementary schools by parking-enforcement area and identify priority intersections within a 1,000-foot radius of each school.

Why it matters: The change moves deployment from a request-based model — where principals request guards and LADOT evaluates them individually — to a holistic assessment intended to direct limited crossing-guard resources where objective data indicate the greatest need.

Under the proposed methodology, LADOT will: generate a citywide ranking of elementary schools using safety, equity and mode-share metrics that the city already employs for other school-safety investments; identify priority intersections within a 1,000-foot radius of each school; and assign guards within the existing enforcement-area boundaries based on availability. Carranza said the method is intended to “capitalize and leverage all the different tools that we use to make streets leading to schools safer,” including speed humps, slow zones and curb extensions.

On volunteers and LAUSD: Carranza and other LADOT staff stated the city cannot run a volunteer crossing-guard program because crossing guards are a unionized, paid workforce. Carranza said, “we cannot also have a city run volunteer program,” and that any volunteer program would need to be administered by Los Angeles Unified School District (LAUSD) and requested by the district or the school.

Committee members pressed LADOT on specifics. A council member asked whether principals can still request paid crossing guards even if the LAUSD central office does not launch a volunteer program; Carranza said paid, city-staffed assignments would remain possible through LADOT’s prioritization and deployment for locations the department assigns. Councillors also asked LADOT to clarify whether a school could privately pay for a city crossing guard; LADOT staff said they were not aware of a current practice allowing schools to pay LADOT for a guard and noted a prior practice of paying for traffic officers via special-event funding was discontinued.

Council concerns and report backs: Several council members asked for more transparency and local detail. The committee asked LADOT to provide a list of schools and assigned crossings for the 2025–26 academic year before school starts, and to report back with a location-by-location table identifying which bureau inside the Department of Public Works (if the department assumes responsibility) could take on maintenance-type tasks tied to individual crossings. The committee also requested LADOT return with options to allow schools or communities to help fund additional staffing or services through a mechanism that would comply with labor and legal constraints.

Effect on existing assignments: LADOT acknowledged the switch could lead to corner reassignment. The department said corners are reviewed annually and that lower-ranked locations may be removed to staff higher-priority sites; LADOT emphasized the change aims to remove bias that can arise from ad hoc requests. A council member representing Council District 11 said the district currently has 32 crossing guards and expressed concern that the proposed methodology could reassign guards away from long-standing locations; on that basis the council member said they would vote no on the item.

Vote and next steps: The committee approved LADOT’s recommendations with the requested additional report backs. The roll call recorded Council Member Hutt — Yes; Council Member Park — No; Council Member Hernandez — Yes. LADOT said it expects to complete the prioritization and notify LAUSD and council districts of assignments before the start of the next school year.

Limitations and open items: LADOT said it has a finite number of crossing guards and that hiring has not kept pace with attrition; staff said they are limited by the number of guards currently employed and by parking-enforcement-area assignment rules (guards are hired per enforcement area and generally serve locally). LADOT also said volunteer programs and school-funded models require further legal and labor review and coordination with LAUSD and the City Attorney.

What the department will report back on: the prioritized school list and assigned corners for 2025–26; a location-by-location mapping to possible Public Works bureaus that could assume maintenance responsibilities tied to crossings and adjacent amenities; clarification of the volunteer request process in coordination with LAUSD; and options for locally funded or grant-funded models to expand crossing coverage.

Ending: LADOT said the department will share the prioritized list with council offices before the school year, and that the methodology is meant to pair crossing-guard assignments with other safety treatments where appropriate.