School District, Police Have Not Been Clear on Role of SRO, Reader Says

During the course of conducting research on a related topic, I have followed the discussion relative to Westfield’s proposed creation of the position of school resource officer.

I am surprised by the apparent lack of transparency on the part of the School Board and their resistance in promoting public debate on an issue of this magnitude. The security assessment and due diligence on the viability of this proposal strikes me as being superficial at best. There also exists mischaracterization and confusion on the part of some Westfield officials when articulating the responsibilities and stated purpose of this position. An issue of this importance and complexity needs to be discussed fully within the community. Community and parental insight should be sought and encouraged by school administrators and the police, not avoided.

It is not my desire or intent to promote a position on the installation of a school resource officer. That responsibility rests solely with the residents of Westfield particularly those with children in the school system. In a decision such as this, thorough due diligence needs to be performed. It is always better to know the good, the bad and the ugly than not know.

Rather than rely solely on a series of formal school board meetings, the School Board should implement several informal town hall style meetings with a give and take on both sides of the issue.

This way public sentiment can be accurately gauged and the Board and administrators can more fully explain their thought process. Governor Christie and members of Congress routinely hold town hall meetings to great advantage. It is important that the Board take all appropriate steps to ensure that the public stays fully informed. In addition, the school system’s web site and social media tools should be engaged in order to share information on this issue and more importantly solicit community input. One only needs to look on the significant number of comments the two Patch stories on this issue have generated. The evidence shows the people of Westfield are demanding more information.

One of the first things the Board needs to do is clearly outline the duties and responsibilities of the position. Is the resource officer someone the students can confide in as has been written? Is the responsibility of the resource officer to be that as a mentor to students as Chief Wayman has stated? Then there is the statement of Board member Lucy Biegler: “that most illegal offenses were happening at the high school level rather than in the elementary or intermediate schools.” Her statement implies that the role of the school resource officer is strictly law enforcement in nature and designed to actively investigate alleged criminal acts by Westfield high school students. If that is the case then the primary role of the school resource officer is being misrepresented to Westfield residents. There is no question that any alleged illegal activity at the high school should be addressed. However having a police officer stationed at the high school full time for that purpose would have a chilling effect on the learning environment.

If the issue of promoting the creation of a school resource officer is being discussed as a way of addressing and mitigating instances of gun violence in schools, NRA hype aside, research on this subject has been inconclusive. Sandy Hook did not have armed personnel in place, however Columbine, Virginia Tech and Santa Monica did. Also, Ft. Hood had armed members of the military on the base. The mere presence of armed police in schools does not guarantee public safety.

When debating the issue of implementing the position of school resource officer parents need to keep in mind that first and foremost these individuals are law enforcement officers. They are not social workers or guidance counselors. Their primary responsibility is to enforce the law, initiate investigations and make arrests.

Studies have determined that there is considerable correlation between the presence of school resource officers and the significant number of juvenile arrests in schools. There are a considerable number of instances where students of all ages were arrested for minor infractions that were best handled by the principal.  In one instance a resource officer arrested a principal for objecting on how the officer was treating a student. There have been several instances where a school resource officer coerced a minor age student into becoming an informant without informing the principal or the child’s parents.

The New York Times did a story entitled “With Police in Schools, More Children in Court” (http://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/12/education/with-police-in-schools-more-children-in-court.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0). The article quotes Denise C. Gottfredson, a criminologist at the University of Maryland and an expert on school violence as saying “There is no evidence that placing officers in schools improves safety,”  “it increases the number of minor behavior problems that are referred to the police.” At times, school resource officers decide on their own initiative to initiate investigations and make arrests of elementary school students for relatively minor acts that ordinarily would have resulted in an admonishment by a teacher or a trip to the principal’s office. Michael Nash, the presiding judge of juvenile court in Los Angeles and the president of the National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges was quoted as saying “you have to differentiate the security issue and the discipline issue.”  “Once the kids get involved in the court system, it’s a slippery slope downhill.”

Westfield Police Chief David Wayman has stated that the school resource officer would receive 7 to 10 days of training. Such an amount of training appears to be rather minimalistic.

Westfield should not implement the position of school resource officer in such a short time frame, and certainly without additional debate on the parameters of the position. The Board needs to develop and publish a formal protocol outlining the duties, powers and limitations of the position. An appropriate period of time must be set aside for public comment.

The formal protocols must clearly define the function of a school resource officer as that of enhancing school safety and security. It should specifically state that the resource officer is responsible for criminal matters not school discipline matters.  There also must be clear lines of authority between the resource officer and the school principal. The school principal should have limited supervisory authority over the resource officer much the way an ambassador has authority over the diplomatic security agents and Marine guards within his Embassy. This may necessitate a change in legislation. Allowing police officers unlimited unsupervised access within a school and its students is a bad idea.

The protocols need to specify that students will not be subject to formal law enforcement intervention of any kind for ordinary school discipline issues and any arrests should be made as a last resort and with consultation with the principal if possible. Students should not be placed under arrest in schools unless the student poses a real and immediate threat to others or if specified by an arrest warrant. If possible the arrest should be made off school grounds. These are merely suggestions of some of the issues that need to be defined between the school district and the police. No doubt there are others that will come to mind on the part of parents, school officials and the police.  Again, there needs to be full transparency and ample time for public comment.

The issue of liability exposure to the school district needs to be examined should the officer lose his weapon or has a negligent discharge of his weapon. Keep in mind there is no such thing as an accidental discharge. They are all negligent and can create serious liability exposure to the school district. Also the liability issues that will arise should the officer shoot a student need to be addressed. There have been far too many documented instances of police officers around the country leaving their weapons behind in school restrooms. Recently in Highland, New York a police officer discharged his gun in a school hallway while on patrol. One police officer actually left his gun on the hood of his car and drove away. In another separate incident an elementary student found a gun that an officer left unattended.

Working together the parents, school officials and the police can decide if a school resource officer is warranted. If that is there mutual informed decision, they can formulate a plan that meets or exceeds best practices and achieves the goal of offering schools and students the best possible protections.

Michael Celock is the Managing Director of Omega Strategic Consulting Group LLC, a corporate governance and risk advisory firm.
 

Celock regularly counsels corporations and universities on strategic planning, risk management, the development of crisis management plans, crisis response and mitigation and corporate compliance matters.  Clients include some of the best known global names, as well as select emerging companies.  He has lectured extensively on the subjects of corporate internal investigation, corporate crisis response, and corporate compliance issues.  Many of his programs provided CLE credit for attorneys.

Celock was named a special advisor to the President and has represented the United States at international forums. He has also served as a consultant to the Department of State and CIA. He has also held senior law enforcement positions within several New York State agencies as well as with the Criminal Division of the United States Department of Justice. While with the New York State Commission of Investigation, he conducted investigations into the New York State Police, the NYS private security industry and the management and governance other state and local government agencies.

Michael Celock 

Celock is the Managing Director of Omega Strategic Consulting Group LLC, a corporate governance and risk advisory firm.

Celock was named a special advisor to the President and has represented the United States at international forums. He has also served as a consultant to the Department of State and CIA. He has also held senior law enforcement positions within several New York State agencies as well as with the Criminal Division of the United States Department of Justice. While with the New York State Commission of Investigation, he conducted investigations into the New York State Police, the NYS private security industry and the management and governance other state and local government agencies.