Senate bill would let the state reallocate unused school safety funds to districts that exhaust their allotments; debate focuses on SROs vs. other supports

Sen. William Fulton presented Senate Bill 136, which would authorize the school safety subcabinet to reallocate unspent Safe Schools Fund dollars within the same fiscal year to local school systems that have exhausted their allocations and demonstrated further need.

"This is not a new funding source," Fulton said. He explained that Maryland annually allocates $10 million for school-safety uses and that significant portions of some counties' allocations go unused while others report unmet need. Fulton used Frederick County as an example, saying the county lists 71 public schools but that only 25 school resource officers are hired and only 10 are assigned full time; his purpose, he said, is to let counties request and receive reallocated funds when others have not expended theirs.

Many committee members pressed for detail on why some counties do not use their allocations and whether the money should instead be redirected to other needs. Delegate Ruff asked whether it would be more appropriate to reallocate unused funds "to other purposes that are much needed in those school systems." Fulton replied the bill's aim is to keep children safe at school and that the reallocated dollars should be available to districts actively trying to keep students safe, including through technology or school resource officer (SRO) staffing.

Several members pushed back on the emphasis on officers. Delegate Acabado noted that the fund's allocations largely go to salaries ("93% of the school safety fund must go to salary, 5% to training, and 2% to equipment") and argued that many school systems ask for counselors, nurses and behavioral specialists rather than more officers. Acabado cited a state Department of Education report indicating a majority of school-based arrests were for nonviolent infractions and said those arrests disproportionately involved Black, Latino and students with disabilities. He asked how adding more SROs would address those disparities.

Fulton and other supporters emphasized that SROs are trained professionals who can respond to violent incidents and cited examples where districts reversed SRO removals after violent incidents occurred. The discussion in committee reflected differing district needs and local preferences about whether personnel (SROs) or nonpolice interventions better promote school safety.

Ending — The committee closed the bill hearing after extended questioning; no vote was recorded. The bill would allow reallocations inside the existing Safe Schools Fund to districts that show demonstrated need within a fiscal year.