Will the Wake County school board require changes in the way school resource officers operate in order for them to continue to patrol the district's high schools and middle schools?
The school board will vote today on these contracts with Raleigh and Cary to provide school resource officers for the 2012-13 school year. The vote comes amid lobbying efforts by several advocacy organizations to get the school system to cut back on the role of SROs, from what they're armed with to what interaction they can have with students on discipline issues.
In an email Monday to school board members, Jason Langberg of Advocates for Children Services wrote that approving the contracts "without more careful consideration of the >issue of SROs in WCPSS would be irresponsible, undemocratic, and arguably, a violation of multiple Board policies."
As part of the email, Langberg enclosed this December white paper from Advocates for Children's Services, the Great Schools in Wake Coalition and the YWCA of the Greater Triangle. The paper recommended several changes Wake should make to the SRO program, including:
* Prohibit SROs from carrying TASERs and to limit their use of pepper spray as a last resort for incidents that cannot be controlled by any other, less harmful, means.
* Require that before searching a student or a student's possessions, SROs have probable cause to believe that a student has committed or is attempting to commit a delinquent or criminal offense and have the principal's express permission. Additionally, Wake should exclude the results of illegal searches from disciplinary proceedings.
* Make it clear that SROS may only intervene in serious criminal issues that cause a major threat to safety, not in minor delinquent acts or incidents that do not involve delinquent activity.
* Restrict when an SRO can refer a student to court, including prohibitions on complaints for minor offenses and offenses that are manifestations of students' disabilities.
* Require involvement of WCPSS staff, students and parents in the selection of SROs.
Langberg included several December letters from groups supporting the white paper:
* YWCA of the Greater Triangle letter
* ACLU of North Carolina letter
* Advancement Project letter
* Coalition of Concerned Citizens for African American Children letter
* Duke Children's Law Clinic letter
* Great Schools in Wake letter
* Letter from attorney Mark Trustin
* N.C. Justice Center letter
* N.C. Juvenile Defender letter
* Letter from UNC Law School Professor Barbara Fedders
Langberg had gotten the school board last year to request Superintendent Tony Tata to review the SRO program. Tata's review praised the program. Langberg has criticized it as not being a real review.
UPDATE/CORRECTION
Click here to view the email sent to board members on Monday. Corrected post to say letter from N.C. Juvenile Defender.
The school board voted 5-4 to table the Cary SRO contract. it went along party lines with the Democrats voting yes and the Republicans voting against tabling.
The board also voted to table the Raleigh SRO contract.
Comments
No Tasers or pepper spray...
Tue, 05/01/2012 - 15:46 — rpm123I guess the lawyers want the officers to use batons instead?
And school officials have for years been exempt from the concept of 'probable cause.' Instead the supreme court ruled that administrators must have 'reasonable suspicion,' a far lower threshold.
This is all nonsense. SROs have made public schools significantly safer, calmer places by their presence.
Re: no tasers or pepper spray
Wed, 05/30/2012 - 00:02 — bburgeA good deal of research has shown exactly the opposite. Study the issue.
Law Enforcement
Tue, 05/01/2012 - 10:10 — MissVWhy is there not a letter from the 12 police chiefs and Sheriff in Wake County, Wake County District Court or Wake County District Attorney?
Interesting point. I'd
Wed, 05/02/2012 - 11:15 — jenmanInteresting point. I'd like to hear from law enforcement what their take is on SROs.
As a parent, I'm glad that they are there.
School vs. Streets
Tue, 05/01/2012 - 07:54 — EveryoneiswrongIt sounds like the group is asking for SROs to follow the same rules that they would if they were patrolling the streets. SROs seem to be working in a gray area when it comes to schools. I think limiting SROs to work within the law is reseasonable, but that also means they carry the same weapons they would on the streets as well.
School officials, however, should not be held to the same legal standard. If a principal wants to search a student for drugs based on a rumor, he or she should be allowed to, just stop ordering SROs around.
?
Tue, 05/01/2012 - 08:14 — Bob_SconceThere's no gray area; it's just that the rules for schools are different because of the need to maintain the educational mission of the school.
Keep it...
Tue, 05/01/2012 - 07:12 — Bob_SconceThere's no compelling reason to get rid of it, and a lot of reasons to believe that the program is beneficial -- the fact that the district principals support it is enough for me. Langberg represents the kids caught by the SRO's; of course he wants to limit what they can do. Requiring probable cause for a search would mean that many of his clients expelled for drug and weapon offenses would be right back in the same environment.
Under Langberg's proposed rules, if an SRO KNOWS that a kid has drugs in his backpack, before searching he would have to have probable cause that the kid has sold drugs at school, is attempting to sell drugs, has used them at school, or is attempting to use them -- the fact that they're there is not enough!
Without SROs, teachers will be responsible for handling more of the school discipline issues. That will have a negative impact on learning and on the district's ability to retain its best teachers.
AGREED...
Tue, 05/01/2012 - 16:46 — VillageMentalityThere are incidences of school-related violence, including bullying among students that are not being addressed by admin because of the fear that they will be labeled racist or culturally insensitive, etc.... Therefore students who should be are not being suspended. On the other hand the punishment is not always meted out consistently among some because with site based management, principals call the shots in their fiefdoms.... What to do....????
Keep the cops, they need to be there in full regalia. Don't really care who's "civil rights" are being violated if it keeps students safe and the focus on learning.... This is a different time and the morality of respecting authority or one another no longer holds the esteem of yesteryear sad to say.
Generally I support SRO's...
Wed, 05/02/2012 - 11:02 — exYank_WCprinif the have the proper personality to interact with the students they supervise. As a principal I need info they can glean through contacts and by being approachable.(Good Cop) Of course, I need that info in additon to the police chief. I always liked the "perp walk", you know take them out in handcuffs during the lunch period. It sends a nice message.(Bad Cop) Other comments:
1. SRO's do not handle routine teacher discipline. They may be called to stop a fight in a classroom but normally a fight is over by the time they get there. AP's whose offices are located throughout the building usually get there first unless they are doing observations, etc. SRO's main responsibility is to establish a "presence!"
2. If you are familair with educational law you know there is a gray area regarding search of and contact with students. Administrators need "reasonable suspicion;" SRO's (at least in NC) are considered police and require "probable cause." SRO's should not be in an admin office while questioning a student and CAN'T be if the student is underage... "intimidation and legal issues" also WC policy.
3. For serious issues...assault with serious injury, weapons, drugs, strangers on campus, gangs, etc. it is good to have them there. If I were the police chief I would want them there if only to be able to identify and start tracking future criminals, but then any veteran kindergarden teacher could probably give you that list.
4. Bullying and threats are complex issues depending on age of students and the nature of the comments. If you had ever done any investigations you would know that. Consistency? The entire school knows the the ultimate decision of a principal or assistant even though it is supposed to be confidential. Believe it or not a principal and AP usually confer doesn't appear to be consistent. Usually there are extenuating circumstances because NO CASE is ever the same. 90% of parents think the punishment of their child is too harsh because "they didn't do it or it wasn't their fault.". What you don't know are the facts of the case. As far as your lack of concern for civil rights, given the tone of your letter I am not surprised. You might last a week as a principal...make that a day.