Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the School Safety topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board postpones SRO contract decisions after members raise safety and selection concerns
Summary
Groveport Madison board delayed approval of proposed school resource officer contracts until July 14 after members cited incidents they said showed officer escalation, questioned contract terms about personnel selection and cost exposure, and asked administration to gather principal feedback and explore alternatives.
The Groveport Madison Local School District Board of Education on June 2 postponed final action on proposed school resource officer (SRO) agreements with Groveport and Madison Township police departments, ordering further review and stakeholder input before a July 14 vote.
Board members said they would not move forward without clearer assurances on selection, performance expectations and substitute coverage. Diana Herbert, a board member, said she had reviewed incident footage and raised concerns about officer conduct, stating the contracts as drafted give police departments “sole control over the personnel decisions” and leave the district financially exposed. "These contracts do not allow for us to change SRO officers. . . . I've seen escalation instead of de‑escalation," Herbert said.
Other board members asked administration to collect feedback from building principals and staff, to ask departments whether the district can have input in officer selection, and to explore alternative options such as Franklin County Sheriff resources or contracted private security. John Kersner recommended checking whether county sheriff coverage could provide greater depth for substitution and staffing flexibility.
The board also flagged specific contract clauses: open-ended financial obligations tied to officers' salaries, automatic renewals unless notice is given, and a lack of guaranteed substitute coverage if an assigned officer is unavailable. Several members asked legal and administration to identify whether the district can negotiate performance standards (for example, adolescent‑specific de‑escalation training) and removal clauses that would allow the district to seek replacements when officers are not meeting expectations.
Superintendent Jamie Grub said he would reach out to the sheriff's office and the city/township departments and gather information; the board asked staff to compile written responses about personnel-selection procedures and union/collective‑bargaining constraints that affect assignments. The motion to postpone the SRO contracts to the July 14 meeting passed unanimously by roll call.
Next steps: administration will solicit building‑level feedback (principals and staff), query local law‑enforcement partners including Franklin County, and return with recommended contract language or alternatives for the July 14 meeting.
