Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the School Safety topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee approves language clarifying school resource officer and security‑guard responsibilities
Summary
The committee approved changes to state law intended to make school resource officers and security guards subject to the same conduct rules as school staff and to clarify liability and investigative pathways for allegations.
House Bill 19‑95, amended in committee, clarifies that school resource officers (SROs) and contracted security guards who work inside Oklahoma public schools fall under the same restrictions as other school employees with respect to prohibited contact with students and related protections.
Representative Trey Turner, the bill’s sponsor, said the amendment adds SROs and security guards to the Title 21 provisions (sections cited in the bill text) that restrict certain conduct: "Just making it where school resource officers cannot have ****** contact with our students. Also security guards cannot be engaged in ****** contact with students as well." Turner said the change responds to how some SROs had been placed under different contract or grant arrangements that left them outside existing school employee provisions.
Members asked about liability when a contracted SRO or guard engages in misconduct. Turner told members the school district that holds the contract could share liability with the contractor: "I believe the liability would be both with the entity of which they are employed and with the school just like we would with a teacher or coach because we're hiring that entity to be inside of our public schools."
Representative Hasenbeck and other members asked whether SROs should be investigators in cases alleging sexual contact; Turner and other commenters said felony‑level allegations are typically referred to outside agencies such as the Oklahoma State Bureau of Investigation or the district attorney’s office, and not handled as internal probes by the SRO’s employer.
After debate the committee recorded a favorable recommendation and will send the bill to the next stage. The committee recorded an affirmative vote and the bill was reported out as a do‑pass.
Ending: The committee approved the amendment and recommended the bill for passage, with members emphasizing referral of criminal investigations to outside law‑enforcement agencies and noting the clarification of contractor liability.
