Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the School Safety topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
School board renews SRO memorandum amid debate over reporting and parental presence
Summary
The Isle of Wight County School Board approved the annual school resource officer (SRO) memorandum of understanding for 2025–26 but board members pressed staff to clarify reporting requirements, which offenses must be reported, and whether principals may sit in for parents during police interviews.
The Isle of Wight County School Board voted Aug. 7, 2025, to approve the annual SRO memorandum of understanding (MOU) for the 2025–26 school year after more than an hour of questions from board members about reporting protocols, required notifications and principal involvement when parents cannot attend.
The board heard a presentation and engaged in detailed discussion about how the MOU would operate in practice. Dr. Christopher Coleman, deputy superintendent for operations, said the MOU is a routine renewal and that the sheriff's office had already signed its copy. "This is the renewed MOU for this upcoming school year. There are no changes from last year," Coleman said.
Board member Mark Kollek and others asked how data and trends from individual SROs are aggregated across the division to identify systemwide issues during the school year, not just in an end-of-year report. Coleman said the district currently compiles an end-of-year report for the Department of Criminal Justice Services but agreed the division's crisis team meeting would be a suitable venue to consider more frequent or informal topic-specific reporting.
Members sought clarity about what incidents the principals must report to law enforcement. Assistant Superintendent Susan Getz described the distinction between routine student discipline and state-code offenses: violent assaults with injury, weapons offenses and drug offenses are among incidents that generate mandatory reporting under state law. Getz explained that the division uses the code of conduct and state reporting requirements to determine which incidents are forwarded to law enforcement.
Board members also raised concerns about a sentence in the MOU that allows an administrator or principal to "serve in the absence of the parents" when an officer needs to question a student. Board member Mr. Kollek said that putting an authority figure in the room during questioning could be intimidating for a student and asked the board to make the language more definitive: if parents decline to participate, an administrator may be present, but when possible parents should be allowed to attend. Dr. Coleman said the division's practice is to contact parents in every case and to proceed only when parents decline or cannot promptly attend; the board agreed to put the point on the division crisis-team agenda for nearer-term review.
After discussion, board member Mr. Cunningham moved to approve the MOU and the board voted to adopt it. The roll call recorded Mr. Kollek, Mr. Cunningham and Mr. Marsh voting "Yes." The board also agreed to continue work with staff, the sheriff's office and school safety personnel to clarify reporting language and to refine the MOU and associated protocols between now and the next review cycle.
Why it matters: the MOU governs how school-based law enforcement and school administrators coordinate on student safety and law enforcement investigations. Board members said clearer, written guidance on when to report offenses and a tighter parental-notification process are priorities before future renewals.
