School Resource Officers for MCC?

[XLFD]

The Mason County Press lays out the case for having a School Resource Officer (SRO) in the Scottville Mason County Central (MCC) High School by quoting MCC's Superintendent Jeff Mount in a recent article.

“When we’re looking at enhancing school safety, it’s a big plus partnering with the City of Scottville.  Doing so has benefits for both of us. This is all about the safety of our children. This is a win-win partnership for both of us and I’m really excited about that on both ends. 

A big part of the school resource officer position is educating children on the law and creating a positive relationship with them. It’s a good thing for our kids to see a uniformed officer who is there to keep them safe and to teach them the differences between the right way and the wrong way of doing things. The SRO will be a part of our school family.”

The City and MCC are planning to create the SRO position in time for the 2019-2020 school year.  The proposal is for the SRO to be a full time Scottville Police Department officer, with 75% of funding coming from Mason County Central Schools.  It was reviewed by the City's public safety and personnel committees and was referred to the full commission to be discussed at their June 3 meeting (mistakenly put down as a June 1st meeting in the article).

Rob Alway, the MCP editor who wrote this article, fails to disclose his conflicts of interest in this matter.  Rob sits on the Scottville City Commission and will vote on this issue, he has already voted to refer it to the full commission as the chairman of the public safety committee.  His wife Becky serves on the MCC School Board, and so will not only have a vote when it comes before that body, but also evaluates Superintendent Mount's performance at his job. 

With his committee approval vote and his article that effectively portrays one side of the issue, let's review the generalizations proposed in the article in favor of having a SRO at MCC High School and consider them in weighing in some of the negative consequences too.  Accordingly, Alway and Mount suggest that the following benefits come from having an SRO:

1) enhancing school safety

2) educating children on the law

3) creating a positive relationship with them

4) teach [students] the differences between the right way and the wrong way of doing things

5) creating a positive role model for the students

It seems clear that if the school district hired the right teachers and other staff, that the students would already know right from wrong, know enough law to keep themselves out of trouble, and have plenty of positive role models.  So the arguments for SROs amount to creating a positive relationship with them, whoever them are, and enhancing school safety.  Let's look at some arguments against.

                      This image from a t-shirt sold by an SRO union in Northern California reveals a common mindset among SROs

Let's first look at the cost.  A full-time police officer in our area costs around $100,000:  Over $60,000 of that cost is their salary, and $30K more is their benefits package.  The City would need to pay $25K of that extra cost, the school would pick up $75K.   Without an increase in taxes, that money would come out of money used for providing City services and from your MCC child's education resources.  Is 'enhanced school safety' worth those costs?

A 2009 study by Dr. Matthew Theriot of the University of Tennessee compared arrest and court records of a number of schools that had SROs and those without.  It was found that there was no difference in serious crime between the two entities.  However, students at SRO patrolled schools were a lot more likely to be arrested for such crimes, but weren't any more likely in getting charged in court with those offenses.

There was one exception:  Students at 'policed schools' were almost five times as likely to face criminal charges for 'disorderly conduct', in other words students were being arrested for conduct that a law enforcement officer felt was disruptive rather than violent. 

Chief Juvenile Court Judge Steven Teske, an outspoken opponent of police in schools testified in front of a Senate panel in 2012 clarified and simplified what the problem was:  "the prosecutor’s attention was taken from the more difficult evidentiary and 'scary' cases — burglary, robberies, car thefts, aggravated assaults with weapons — to prosecuting kids that are not 'scary,' but made an adult mad."

A 2015 study published in the Washington University Law Review came to similar conclusions. From the executive summary: 

"Drawing on recent restricted data from the US Department of Education, this Article presents an original empirical analysis revealing that a police officer’s regular presence at a school is predictive of greater odds that school officials refer students to law enforcement for committing various offenses, including these lower-level offenses. This trend holds true even after controlling for: (1) state statutes that require schools to report certain incidents to law enforcement; (2) general levels of criminal activity and disorder that occur at schools; (3) neighborhood crime; and (4) other demographic variables. The consequences of involving students in the criminal justice system are severe, especially for students of color, and may negatively affect the trajectory of students’ lives. Therefore, lawmakers and school officials should consider alternative methods to create safer learning environments."

Neither the school, City of Scottville, or the Mason County Press have offered an alternative method.  Yet it isn't just a bureaucratic problem of clogging up juvenile court. The reason the school-to-prison pipeline is an issue is that students are much less likely to succeed in school and in their subsequent life when they're in the grip of the juvenile justice system.

Given such information, a school that agrees to put a police officer on its grounds is unknowingly agreeing to send some of its students to juvenile court for behavior they would never be prosecuted for if there weren't a cop in the hall to witness them.  It's condemning at least some of those students to failure.

But what about all those school shootings?  Between 1990 and 2018,  there have been 22 shootings at schools in which two or more people were shot-- about two every three years.  At this rate, your school has about a 1 in 150,000 chance of having a mass shooting event this year.  Nor does an RSO guarantee things won't go bad.  Recall that Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School did have a sheriff’s deputy named Scott Peterson on duty at time of the shooting, but that he was not a factor in mitigating the matter.

Lastly, let's look at the use of force issue. Police are authorized to use force in a way that teachers and school administrators are not. This is because all officers are trained to use force. Administrators and teachers are trained to counsel, de-escalate and discipline in other ways. When administrators increasingly turn to on-site police officers to discipline students, it means more kids will be handcuffed, Tased and beaten. There have been a number of incidents over the years that made national headlines.  Even more national headlines exist concerning inappropriate sexual behavior, where the officer uses their power and position to get their jollies.

Michigan is one of 37 states that require no specialized training for SROs, so do not be surprised when every problem looks like a nail to the hammer that may be stationed at MCC High School.  Kids require patience, subtlety and empathy.  Police officers on average get 120 hours of training in using force for every 8 hours in conflict resolution.

County schools have invested hundreds of thousands in hardware for doors, practiced live-action shooting drills with area law enforcement, and have made building security a priority.  Yet, now they want to justify a significant annual expense which only seems to get negative returns, on average.  You may want to let your school and city board know the full facts before they use your tax dollars for this addition.

[XLFD]

The City of Scottville pulled another fast one on the locals last night, voting to supply MCC with a resource officer.  Scottville Commissioner Rob Alway reports in the Mason County Propagandist:  

"The SRO will be a full time Scottville Police Department officer, with 75% of funding coming from Mason County Central Schools."  In other words, the taxpayers of the district will pay 100% of this additional cost, the already tax-burdened city residents, will pay a bigger share.

Alway then replays the Superintendent Mount refuted quote from his previous article.  Enjoy the additional $100K price tag each year MCC district residents, as your high school student's chances of going through the criminal justice system, rather than the school's counseling system, has increased dramatically.

[Willy]

Not only are taxpayers forced to pay school taxes for sidewalks but now they are forced to pay for police officers. Hey Scottville taxpayers, pay attention to how your school taxes are being used. The next dip into your school taxes could be paying for Clown Band expenses or raised toilet seats at the old folks home.

[shinblind]

It must be an interesting contract. 180 days at 6.5 hours a day then what?  What about after school events? Will the officer be riding the bus to away games. Will this be considered overtime? 

Who will represent the officer during contract negotiations? The MEA? POMA? Teamsters?  Will the officer have summers off to further his education?

Nothing like the government tossing taxpayers funds at a none problem all the while real world maintenance issues will not be addressed. 

[XLFD]

Good questions, of course neither the before or after article offers any idea what program or educational service is going to be raided to fund the SRO program from the school budget, and where the extra money is going to be coming from in the city budget.  Despite Alway working on the board of the latter, his wife on the board of the former.  It's almost as if our media don't want the public to know these things, the superintendent's nonsense logic is enough.

You don't like it, send your children to Ludington schools, the taxpayers there could use an extra hand after shooting themselves in the foot with a $100 million bullet.