Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the School Resource Officers topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Bothell community speakers urge board to expand SRO program; some concern after June 9 vote showed two nay votes

AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Speakers from Bothell expressed continued support for the School Resource Officer (SRO) interlocal agreement with the City of Bothell and asked the board to expand the program to additional interested schools; one speaker noted the interlocal agreement was approved on June 9 with two board members voting no.

Members of the Bothell community urged the Northshore School District board to continue and expand the district's School Resource Officer (SRO) interlocal agreement with the City of Bothell and to sustain the student wellness and safety task force work that preceded the current arrangement.

Crystal Radisky, a 16-year Bothell High School teacher and Bothell parent, said she was relieved the June 9 vote on the interlocal agreement was approved but was discouraged that two board members voted no. She asked the board to consider the visible and recorded support for the SRO program: "I believe there have been more than 65 people who have come forward. 25 have been Bothell High School students," she said, and she described student focus groups and town halls the community organized.

Radisky thanked Superintendent Michael Tully for convening the student wellness and safety task force and asked the board to continue that group's work under the incoming superintendent. She also expressed concern about low response rates to a Bothell High School survey noted during prior board discussion and asked the board to explain the two nay votes to the community.

The item was offered during the association and public comment period and did not result in board action that evening; the June 9 interlocal agreement was referenced by the speaker as approved on that date.