Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Education Safety Sro topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council approves amended SRO agreement with Mason Public Schools after extended questioning
Summary
Mason City Council approved a first amendment and restated agreement with Mason Public Schools to provide a school resource officer, 7-0, after extended discussion about who pays costs, scheduling and employment responsibilities.
The Mason City Council on Sept. 15 voted 7-0 to approve the First Amendment and restated agreement between the City of Mason and Mason Public Schools (MPS) to provide a school resource officer (SRO).
The amendment sparked extended questions from Mayor Pro Tem Clark, who said she was "really confused by this whole agreement" and cited what she described as contradictions in the draft about who pays costs, the officer’s schedule, who is the employer and who pays for training. Clark asked whether the city would be responsible for 25% of costs or whether the school would reimburse the city fully.
City staff responding to the council said the amendment was drafted to allow flexibility — to permit either a full-time SRO integrated into the police department or a reduced/seasonal SRO assignment — and that both parties’ attorneys had reviewed the language. Staff said MPS agrees to pay the city’s "actual cost" for school-related time, replacing an earlier 75% payment provision; equipment and uniform purchases were largely addressed in the initial contract and, in the amended structure, the school will pay for a large portion of vehicle and equipment rental costs.
Staff said the patrol vehicle used by the SRO is funded through equipment rental and is generally paid about 75% by the school under the agreement. The SRO position will be the city’s employee for hiring and benefits purposes, will be integrated into the police department's field training officer (FTO) program and report to the police chief. Staff also said because the position may not be full time, the city may avoid full benefit and retirement costs in some scenarios.
Council members pressed for clearer language in one clause specifying whose human-resources director would be consulted about the SRO work schedule; staff agreed to clarify that item. Clark said she supports the SRO program but worried that a reduced/seasonal SRO would lessen public visibility of the officer in non-school settings.
The council approved the amendment 7-0. Staff said they had already hired a candidate with SRO experience and that the arrangement provides cost relief to the city by shifting many school-related costs to MPS.
