Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Grant School Safety topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board approves DCJS grant for sheriff's office school-safety liaison amid debate over timing and cost
Summary
The Board approved acceptance of a Virginia Department of Criminal Justice Services grant to fund a school-safety liaison position in the sheriff's office after extended debate over timing, whether the role should be sworn, and future local costs; roll call showed four yes votes and one no.
The Shenandoah County Board of Supervisors voted to accept a Virginia Department of Criminal Justice Services grant to fund a school-safety liaison position in the sheriff's office after extended discussion about timing, position type and long-term costs.
Why it matters: Board members raised concerns about approving grant-funded positions outside the regular budget cycle because grants can create ongoing local budget obligations if the county chooses to continue the position after grant funds end.
What was proposed: County officials described an opportunity to apply for and accept grant funds to place a liaison who would work directly with schools on critical-incident planning, training, and related school-safety duties. Officials said the position could be civilian or sworn but emphasized a civilian placement allows the person to begin work sooner without a lengthy academy timeline.
Key debate: Several supervisors questioned the timing and the board's lack of prior notice that a grant application had been submitted. One supervisor said the grant request "puts me in a bad position" because it arrives in the middle of a budget cycle and could create ongoing costs; another asked whether the salary would be $98,000 for an employee who may not be a law-enforcement officer. County staff responded that the grant amount covers part of the cost and that the salary plus benefits are $56,000 (a figure described by staff as including benefits), while the speaker also referenced a county match figure but said they could not recall the exact number.
Vote: The roll-call vote recorded Mister Baker in support, Mister Ferguson opposed, and Mister Ralston, Mister Morris and Mister Stevens in favor, so the motion to accept the grant carried.
Next steps and caveats: Officials said they would use vacancy savings and the grant match to support the position in the near term and that there is no guarantee the position will continue after grant funds end. Several supervisors requested better advance notification for future grant applications and suggested staff notify supervisors earlier when such opportunities arise so the board can discuss priorities before grants are submitted.
