Charlottesville board hears wide community opposition and staff outline next steps on SRO MOU

The Charlottesville City Schools board spent the bulk of its meeting on the proposed memorandum of understanding (MOU) to place School Resource Officers (SROs) in city schools, hearing repeated calls from teachers, parents and students to slow or stop the process while staff outlined a more intensive engagement schedule.

Dozens of speakers during two public-comment opportunities pressed the board to expand outreach and to incorporate community recommendations into the draft MOU. Teacher and community members described the current working group as administrator-heavy and said earlier stakeholder efforts in 2019 were sidelined; many urged the board to restart or substantially revise the process before signing an agreement. “Pause the MOU process and start again,” teacher and community member Emily Kingsley told the board, citing national reporting and scholarship questioning whether SROs reduce campus violence.

Board members and staff defended a deliberate approach while acknowledging concerns. Miss Chuck, who presented a summary of the engagement to date, said the district has collected detailed feedback via a Google form (52 responses so far) and scheduled about 15 public “info hours” during September and October, plus multiple workgroup meetings for staff and stakeholders. She said the district expects to finalize the MOU and its standard operating procedures (SOPs) after that input; under the current timeline staff anticipate budget work in winter, hiring and training in spring and an initial implementation of four SROs in August 2026 if city funding and timelines align.

Cost and selection questions were focal points. Public commenters and some board members noted staff and community estimates that the four SRO positions would cost roughly $800,000 to $900,000 in the first year and about $300,000–$400,000 annually afterward. Several board members requested the work group produce a clear, written rationale for the proposed headcount, including counts or trends in threat assessments and other operational data that would justify four full-time positions.

Board members also pressed for specifics the MOU or SOP should address: who will be involved in hiring and selection, whether officers will wear body cameras, how complaint and reporting mechanisms will function, and how the district will measure the program’s impacts. Miss Burns and others asked for transparent metrics showing current police interactions with students, including the kinds of incidents police currently respond to in schools.

Superintendent Dr. Gurley and other supporters said the decision reflects both community safety concerns and incidents in the community and schools that prompted administrators to request law enforcement collaboration. “SROs is just one of [the] hard decisions,” Dr. Gurley said, and staff emphasized the goal of building an MOU that tightly defines roles, training and oversight.

At the end of the meeting the board directed the SRO work group to return with: a one-page rationale explaining how staff arrived at four positions and the data sources used; counts or trends for threat assessments; clarification on whether body cameras will be required and how complaints will be filed and investigated; and documentation of current Charlottesville Police Department interactions in schools. Those deliverables are to inform subsequent revisions to the draft MOU and SOP before the board moves toward any final action.

The district will continue community meetings throughout September and October and plans a follow-up board session with legislators on Oct. 23. No final MOU approval by the board was recorded at the meeting; staff characterized MOUs as an administrative practice that typically do not require a formal board vote but affirmed they will return with tightened language and supporting data.