WARWICK — Calling it a bad deal for taxpayers, the City Council last night unanimously rejected not one but two proposed contracts with the municipal crossing guards union, leaving the future of the city-run program in question.

The surprise of the evening came in that all nine members of the council banded together to vote down the deals, saying the city cannot afford to supply lifetime benefits to employees who work less than 20 hours a week.

The vote came just hours after Mayor Scott Avedisian submitted an amended contract offering small changes over the agreement that had been before the council for months. The new proposal eliminated post-retirement benefits for guards hired after the contract is ratified and made several other minor changes.

But the substance of the deal remained the same: it cut more than $150,000 (roughly the same amount a private firm said it would cut) from the annual crossing guards’ budget by reducing the number of guards from 23 to 18, while promising to cover the same number of crossing stations. It also offered salaries of $39.50 per day (roughly $10,000 a year) and $11 weekly contributions to the cost of health coverage in year one of the contract.

“I would have liked to see the mayor come back with a little better contract. Benefitwise, I wanted to see something better,” council member Donna M. Travis said. Travis was one of several council members who, at one time, expected to vote in favor of the municipal contract.

Prior to the vote, Donald S. Iannazzi, business manager for Local 1033 of the Laborers International Union of North America, which represents the crossing guards, assured the council that they would be back on the job today, regardless of how the council voted.

But in the long term, their fate and the question of who will guide the city’s schoolchildren across the street is unknown.

Reached by phone after last night’s vote, Avedisian said the city has three options now: “go out to private contractor [as some on the council have pushed for], renegotiate with the Laborers union, or tell the School Department: ‘This is your issue, it’s time to step up to the plate,’ ” Avedisian said, referring to a proposal put forth earlier this month by council members who suggested shifting jurisdiction of the guards to city schools. The Police Department currently oversees the crossing guards.

The mayor said last night that he had not yet spoken to his personnel director, Oscar Shelton, about the city’s next move but would start that discussion this morning.

When his administration returned to the bargaining table with the union in recent weeks, why didn’t it push for a better deal?

“We did press them a lot. We did ask for a lot of concessions and that is all they were willing to give,” Avedisian said. “They met what the private contractor said that they could do and then [the union was] able to move forward and say they would give us more in saying they would change health-care benefits for future hires. Obviously the council didn’t like that decision. So now we have to decide how we deliver that service and keep moving on.”

Iannazzi declined comment last night. He asserted that the union’s side of the story has not been fairly expressed, but he refused to speak to a reporter. Following the council vote, he told the crossing guards who gathered for the meeting: “Keep your heads tall and your chins up. Tomorrow is another day.”

Under the City Charter, the municipal guards can continue to work under the terms of the old contract until a new deal — private or otherwise — is negotiated, according to Shelton.

Prior to last night’s vote, council members had little to say on the issue. Following the meeting, council members Robert A. Cushman and Steve Merolla, longtime proponents of cutting crossing-guard costs, applauded the council’s decision to vote against “a bad deal.”

Others seemed ambivalent.

“I feel bad for them,” council member Helen Taylor said of the crossing guards. “They are not just numbers, they are people with families and they work hard. Obviously having Blue Cross [Blue Shield insurance] is important to them.”

At one time Taylor had signaled she might vote in favor of a municipal contract. But last night she said she could not advocate any deal that offers lifetime benefits in tight economic times.

“If [the mayor] came up with something that was reasonable …” she said, not finishing her sentence.

cneedham@projo.com