Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the School Safety topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council approves addition of four school crossing safety advocates after members say they were not shown original contract
Summary
The council approved a Feb. 1 amendment to the city's school crossing-guards service contract to add four safety advocates and increase the contract by $24,211 to $510,540.75; several council members said they had not seen the original contract and urged better prior communication even as they voted to avoid delaying service for students.
The Chester City Council on Jan. 22 voted to approve an amendment to the city's service contract for school crossing guards that adds four safety advocates, expands coverage at four additional locations and increases the contract by $24,211 for the remainder of the 2024–2025 school year.
The resolution says the amendment takes effect Feb. 1, 2025, increases the contract to a total of $510,540.75 and states the Chester Upland School District is required by law to pay half of the cost.
Several council members raised concerns during the meeting that the original contract did not come before council for approval and that they had not previously seen the full contract language. One councilor said, "I do not feel comfortable making amendments to this contract since the city council did not approve the contract. Therefore, I've never even seen the contract. So I'm not going to vote on a contract that I have not seen," and declined to support the amendment on that basis. (The speaker in the transcript spoke during the council debate; the meeting record attributes the contractual origin to the receiver's team.)
Mister Moore, a city staff member, offered to provide the councilor with the contract, saying, "I could certainly get you a copy of the contract." Mayor Ruth and other council members urged approval of the amendment to avoid delaying additional staffing at crossing locations while the city obtains a copy of the agreement.
Mayor Ruth described the original contracting decision as part of a city direction to move to an outside vendor for crossing-guard services; she said the vendor selection had followed a fair process and that the amendment is a necessary operational step.
The council approved the amendment with recorded votes in favor from Councilors Gibson Williams, Green, West, Davis and Mayor Ruth. The transcript shows the motion and a second, discussion, and a roll-call vote recorded as "Yes" from each member present.
The council did not change the contract procurement process at the meeting. Officials said they would provide the contract text to council members who requested it and improve communications on similar arrangements going forward.
