Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the School Resource Officers topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
School board reviews revised SRO memorandum proposing two‑officer pilot and stronger reporting protections
Summary
School leaders presented Version 2 of an SRO MOU to pilot two officers (one high school, one middle school), add joint selection with the police, strengthen student privacy and automatic pause triggers; community members urged clarity on weapons, selection, and how officers will be evaluated.
Charlottesville City School Board members heard a detailed update on a revised memorandum of understanding (MOU) for School Resource Officers (SROs) that would pilot two officers — one based at the high school and one at the middle school — with both able to float to other campuses as needed.
District staff said the Charlottesville Police Department (CPD) will repurpose two existing vacant positions to implement the pilot without requesting additional city funding. The revised MOU adds clearer accountability measures, including joint selection of SROs by Charlottesville City Schools (CCS) and CPD; a requirement that all "official contacts" between SROs and students be logged and reviewed; public reporting provisions; and a clause that the MOU will automatically pause if CPD comes under federal operational control or engages in immigration‑enforcement activities that share student/family immigration status.
The presentation emphasized that the MOU is a high‑level agreement and that the accompanying standard operating procedures (SOP) will define operational details such as whether SROs will wear body‑worn cameras and how weapon storage and access will be secured. The revised agreement also incorporates student‑centered language modeled in part on guidance from the New York Civil Liberties Union, and specifies specialized training requirements for SROs including de‑escalation, bias awareness, working with students with disabilities, and child and adolescent development.
Community members who testified, including students and parents, reiterated concerns about SROs carrying firearms and asked for clearer explanations of when weapons could be accessed, how officers will be selected and supervised, and how the program will be evaluated. Superintendent and staff repeatedly invited stakeholders to review the full updated MOU on the district website and noted that the MOU remains under review by the city attorney and that the SOP is expected to be published about Oct. 15.
Next steps described by staff include publishing the SOP, convening advisory and evaluation working groups, and collecting ongoing qualitative and quantitative feedback (including climate surveys and SBAR reporting) that will be used to assess program impacts. Board members asked staff and CPD to develop an evaluation rubric and a collaborative process for annual SRO performance reviews.
The board did not take final action on the MOU at this meeting; staff said they will return with further operational details and suggested evaluation tools.
