Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the School Safety topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
District 15 reviews safety protocols, considers wearable duress devices after first‑responder briefing
Summary
District officials summarized layered safety measures already in place and said they are evaluating new technology, including wearable duress badges, ahead of a life‑safety survey presentation next month.
District 15 administrators told the board they have a layered set of safety measures in place and are evaluating additional technologies after a recent safety committee meeting with first responders from municipal police and fire departments.
What the district has now: administrators said schools use visitor management (Raptor), secured vestibules and locked classroom doors, 360‑degree surveillance cameras, silent alarms and panic buttons, strobe lights in noisy areas, walkie‑talkies, an app‑based mass notification system (Brivo/Bridlegate/Bridlego? the district referenced ParentSquare and "Bridal Go" as its mass notification/app tools), and school resource officers aligned to elementary feeder patterns. Administrators told the board the district regularly runs threat‑assessment and crisis‑team protocols and that police partners have direct access to campus cameras during incidents.
Evaluating new technology: staff said safety consultants and first responders recommended the district investigate wearable duress devices (sometimes discussed under "Alyssa's Act" proposals in other states). The devices resemble badge‑sized wearable units that can be pressed in an emergency to notify first responders. District staff said vendors' products typically send heavy duress alerts to police, so the district is gathering cost, false‑alarm mitigation and operational detail before deciding on deployment.
Process and constraints: administrators noted that any health‑and‑safety‑related equipment must be coordinated with first responders and that systems such as drones, metal detectors and armed staff carry operational and policy tradeoffs; police representatives did not recommend drones or routine metal detection as district solutions. District staff said many of the suggestions will require further analysis and that the district will return with cost and implementation recommendations if it pursues devices or camera enhancements.
Ending: safety leaders said they continue to refine emergency communications and camera usability and will present the results of the 10‑year life‑safety survey and any recommended upgrades at the next board meeting.
