Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the SRO Program topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Representative advances plan to restore school resource officers; committee moves resolution for further review
Summary
Representative Goule presented a late-circulated resolution June 10 urging restoration of the district SRO program to earlier staffing levels (roughly 80 officers). The committee voted to advance the draft for further review and placement on a future working-session agenda.
Get email alerts on the SRO Program topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Representative Goule presented a draft resolution arguing the district's School Resource Officer (SRO) program has shrunk sharply since 2020, creating what he described as a staffing crisis. He asked the committee to advance a non-inflammatory draft calling the SRO program an "essential component" of a comprehensive school-safety strategy and urging restoration toward previous staffing levels.
Goule summarized the history: a July 15, 2020 board recommendation and subsequent council legislation that phased the SRO program down over five years. He said attrition and reduced recruitment left the program with roughly 80 SROs several years ago and about 35 this school year, prompting use of a cluster model that assigns officers across multiple schools.
"That created a crisis in just two years," Goule said, and he cited principals' testimony in 2023 urging restoration and an incident at Jackson Reed used to illustrate what he described as the consequences of reduced staffing.
Several members, including a student representative who described a positive bond with a school security officer, expressed support for advancing the draft resolution for full review. The committee voted to move the resolution forward to the board working session (with time for members and staff to review before the working session).
The draft as circulated asks for restoration of SRO staffing to prior levels and recommends the board transmit a constructive, non-inflammatory proposal to the working session and full board. Staff will add the draft to a tracker and circulate next steps; the committee noted scheduling constraints (no July meeting) and requested a clear timeline for review.
No formal implementation plan or funding source was adopted; the committee advanced the draft for additional review at the working session.

