Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the School Safety topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Newport-Mesa board approves renewed OC GRIP contract after heated debate, 5–2
Summary
After public opposition and trustee proposals to scale the program, the Newport-Mesa Unified School District board voted 5–2 to approve a renewal agreement with the Orange County District Attorney—s Office to facilitate the OC GRIP Waymakers case manager component for the 2025-26 school year; the DA offered to work with an ad hoc committee to refine the model.
Get email alerts on the School Safety topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Newport-Mesa Unified School District board voted to approve a renewal agreement with the Orange County District Attorney—s Office to facilitate the OC GRIP Waymakers case manager component for the 2025-26 school year, after an extended public comment period and a contentious trustee debate.
Trustees adopted the contract on a 5— vote after a substitute motion to limit the program to two sites failed to move forward. Student board member Jeremy Lore moved to approve the renewal as presented; Trustees Weigand, Murphy, Pearson, McElroy and Crane joined him in voting yes, while Trustees Ersoylu and Anderson voted no.
The contract as written lists three elementary sites (Wilson, Ray and Whittier) for GRIP services. Community speakers at the meeting urged the board to reject or limit the program. Andy Godinez, a Newport-Mesa alumnus and Westside Costa Mesa resident, said he opposed placing law-enforcement-led programming in elementary schools because "law enforcement in schools are already ingrained" and feared the program could "normalize a punitive climate" (public comment). Eric Jimenez, a longtime Costa Mesa resident, told the board: "Policing our children has to stop," adding that community alternatives such as nonprofit-run mentorships were more appropriate for young students.
Vice President Trustee Ersoylu moved a substitute motion to approve GRIP in two sites (Whittier and Ensign) rather than three, framing the change as a pilot and modernization of the program. Ersoylu said the intent was to "go slow to go fast" — pilot improvements at a smaller scale to avoid pulling students out of core instruction and to test after-school or lunchtime delivery options. She also said the program as delivered historically skews male and recommended changes to reach girls and to reduce unintended academic impacts.
Representatives of the DA's office, including District Attorney Spitzer and Assistant District Attorney Katie David, urged the board to approve the contract as recommended by staff and the Costa Mesa Police Department (CMPD). Spitzer told trustees he was "100% committed" to working with the district to tailor the program and asked that the board appoint an ad hoc committee to refine implementation over the coming year rather than alter schools in the middle of the school term. "I'm open to every suggestion and every recommendation," Spitzer said, while also warning that changing the written contract now would complicate implementation because of staffing and coordination constraints.
Board members who voted to approve the contract emphasized safety and the program—s history. Trustee McElroy said she had researched the program and described it as "mentoring" that provides protective supports to students; Trustee Crane said keeping the original contract language preserved staff discretion and funding options for the district.
What happens next
The agreement as approved permits the district and the DA—s office to proceed with GRIP services at the contract sites for 2025-26. The DA offered to work with a trustee ad hoc group and district staff during the contract term to explore program modifications, data reporting, privacy protections around student images and media, and ways to emphasize school-based counselors and training rather than adding separate social-work staff funded by the DA if that approach proves feasible.
The board recorded the final vote in public session; implementation details, site-level staffing and the DA—s follow-up with school principals and police partners were left to staff-level discussions and the proposed ad hoc group.

