Advisory Commission on Policing votes to send County Council a summary of school-safety forum, seeks research on SROs

The Montgomery County Advisory Commission on Policing voted May 11 to prepare a letter to the County Council that both summarizes an April public forum on school safety and sets out considerations the council should weigh as it evaluates the role of school resource officers.

Christie (committee member) moved that the commission "prepare a letter to the council that both summarizes the content of our most recent public forum as well as provides... context on how we plan as an advisory commission to work on this issue in the near future," a motion seconded by Francisco Gonzalez, the commission’s vice chair. The motion passed by voice vote.

The commission framed the action as a factual summary rather than a policy endorsement. Francisco Gonzalez, vice chair, said the commission should focus on measurable outcomes: "What are the documented effects of police officers on material incidences of violence in schools, not feelings of safety?" He urged the group to examine connections to arrest rates, suspensions and racial disparities.

Terry, who led the school-safety subcommittee, said the April forum included about a dozen public speakers, with roughly nine speaking in favor of SROs and the remainder opposed. She said the county’s April 21 briefing — which included Youth and Family Services, behavior-crisis staff, police and school security leadership — presented a wide range of supports and staffing models that the subcommittee needs time to analyze.

Commissioners agreed the letter should summarize the forum’s substance and identify considerations for the council, not attempt definitive policy prescriptions. A volunteer drafting team was formed with Christie leading and members including Francisco Gonzalez, Harry, John and others; Christie said she would circulate a draft for the June meeting.

The commission also discussed seeking outside research help. Commissioners suggested asking Eric Reist, the county’s civilian deputy director, to prepare a white paper and suggested recruiting an academic or graduate student to perform a targeted comparative analysis of high schools that regularly use community-engagement officers versus those that do not. Susan offered to reach out to county contacts; Christie said she would contact her academic connection to ask about timeline and any literature reviews that could be shared.

The commission scheduled no formal deadline beyond a goal to present a draft at the June meeting. The letter is intended to provide a clear, evidence-focused summary for the County Council and to describe how the commission plans to continue work on the issue.

The commission also noted that the topic has become politically charged locally, and several members stressed that the commission’s product should emphasize data and limitations rather than advocacy.

Next steps: the drafting team will circulate a draft before the June meeting; staff and volunteers will pursue the suggested research contacts and report back at the next monthly meeting.