Paterson schools report fewer HIB incidents but rise in student substance positives, administrators say

Monique McKay, the district’s coordinator for harassment, intimidation, and bullying, told the Paterson Public School District board on Feb. 11 that the SSDS (school safety data system) is the New Jersey Department of Education’s mandated reporting system and used for compliance monitoring and public reporting. “The SSDS system is a school safety, data system,” McKay said, and she described the Anti‑Bullying Bill of Rights Act and the district’s investigation timeline, which requires an inquiry to begin within one school day and to be completed in 10 school days.

McKay said the district recorded 144 HIB incidents during reporting‑period 1 (Sept.–Dec. 2025), and that 41 were determined to be founded and 62 unfounded; she also described inconclusive and partially founded cases and presented a unit‑by‑unit breakdown (Unit 2 accounted for the largest share in her slides). McKay stressed the legal criteria that distinguish ordinary conflict from HIB and that substantiation rests on the evidence gathered during the investigation. “The investigation period is … 10 school days to be completed,” she said.

Laurel Olson, supervisor of student support services, presented the SSDS substance‑use data. She said there were 149 student referrals for testing between Sept. and Dec. 2025; of those, 112 were positive and 37 negative, and 27 students refused testing. “Of all the 149 cases that were reported, 75 percent of them are positive,” Olson told the board, and she noted a roughly 14 percent increase in positives compared with the same point last year. Olson also provided a possession breakdown: 70 possession cases this school year, including 55 cases involving THC vape pens, seven involving marijuana, five paraphernalia cases, two alcohol cases and one prescription medication case. Olson said the district recently added nicotine to the test panel and that some results are incomplete when students refuse testing or seek outside medical exams.

Dalton Price, director of security and emergency preparedness, walked the board through the SSDS incident categories and disciplinary removals. He said the district had 143 incidents leading to removal this school year and enumerated incident counts across categories (for example, 61 violence incidents, 38 assaults, 16 fights and 10 weapons possessions). Price told the board there had been no incidents that required police involvement so far this school year. “So far this school year, we don't have any incidents involving the police,” he said.

Board members asked clarifying questions about how investigators apply the HIB criteria, repeat allegations, and situations with no identified aggressor (McKay said those can include off‑campus cyberbullying or cases where the alleged aggressor could not be identified). Olson explained that staff may refer students for testing based on observed symptoms or possession and that referral decisions are case‑by‑case; she said the district notifies parents and offers medical exams through a contracted vendor.

The district’s presenters emphasized compliance and prevention: McKay said SSDS reporting “is not optional” and supports transparency and intervention planning, while Olson outlined partnerships with external providers and prevention programming.

The board did not take formal action on the safety or substance reports during the meeting; presenters said cases are shared with the board for oversight and will appear again as part of regular monitoring.