To be discussed Wednesday.
Draft Report to Board of Education dated July 13, 2018 ERO Ad Hoc Committee Summary
Over the past 16 Months, we have done a thorough analysis of the Educational Resource Officer (ERO) program, currently in operation as a joint agreement between the Madison Metropolitan School District (MMSD) and the City of Madison (CoM) via the Madison Police Department (MPD). Our committee has examined many different aspects of the current program, looked at best practices of similar sized school districts across the United States, and heard from hundreds of community members, youth, educators, administrators, law enforcement professionals, social workers, youth advocates and other stakeholders. Throughout this work, there has not been a compelling case made as to why the current operations of the Educational Resource Officers should remain, as is, or that there is not room for a reexamination of the relationship between the Madison Police Department and the Madison Metropolitan School District.
As our Ad-Hoc Committee on the Educational Resource Officers has not been granted the authority to make a final decision, we do not think it is necessary or prudent for us to take a vote as to whether MMSD should continue the ERO program; however, during the thorough analysis conducted over the past 16 months, there are a number of considerations that were brought up, which we believe the MMSD School Board should examine, regardless of whether they choose to continue the ERO program at our schools.
Lastly, while we do believe that there is room for reexamination of the relationship between MPD and MMSD, we do not think that the termination of the ERO contract will mean that MPD will no longer play a critical role in the work of MMSD, especially in an environment where there is a proliferation of firearms and the external threats of gun violence remain omnipresent at our school sites. From this perspective, we also do not necessarily think ending the ERO contract will completely remedy this, and strongly believe that there is a lot of room for a reconsideration of the roles and relationships MPD employees have within our schools, and a much closer look at how our school leadership is utilizing their other support and security staff, relative to the way that our ERO’s are currently operating at the school sites. If there are relationships between disproportionate contact with police in our schools for folks of color and the ERO contract itself, we would accept that these relationships may very well be spurious at best, and demand a much deeper analysis as to the root cause as to why our students and staff are not feeling safe in the places where we ask them to trust us to be educated and to be able to educate.
This is a very complex issue, the roots of which may very well lay in arenas that were not broached during this committee’s work. Areas such as the proliferation of firearms, healthy housing, equitable economic development, health equity, mental wellness, and the residual effects of land use policy in Madison, WI have lurked about throughout our work, and we recommend that some semblance of this work continue in order to address the role these arenas play in the challenges we face in terms of school safety and student well-being.
The following is the charge of the ERO Committee along with suggested policy and language changes.
ERO Committee Charge
Review existing MMSD data, federal and local guidance, contracts and policies related to Educational Resource Officers.
Review current research on the use and effectiveness of Educational Resource Officers and/or School Resource Officers.
Review best practices related to Educational Resource Officers and/or School Resource Officers from other districts and locales.
Develop possible recommendations for amendments to contract language and board policy based on feedback from the community in regard to our discussions, information-sharing sessions and monthly meetings.
Exchange input and feedback with the working committee before their recommendations on policy and contract language are forwarded to the Board for consideration.
Report to the Board of Education a summary of the work of the Committee on the Educational Resource Officers in MMSD.
Policy–
1. Amend Policy 4400- Investigation, Interrogation, Arrest and Search to include a Grievance Procedure that should be developed and instituted.
2. Remove language in regard to mandatory time limits of Liaison officers.
3. Continue with an ongoing reporting/record keeping requirements in each school.
4. Training. The Liaison Team should be given staff development in all areas of discipline, security measures, BEP and classroom Code of Conduct.
5. Restorative Justice. Referrals should be available for all students not at the discretion of the officer.
6. Implement Restorative Justice practices throughout the school district according to the Strategic Framework and incorporate it into each schools SIP.
7. Incorporate the Police Liaison plan into the full School District Safety Plan.
8. No police will be called into a classroom to deal with behavior issues. (See Classroom Code of Conduct 4502A-Removal of Student from the Classroom by Teacher or BEP)
9. Security Staff’s job descriptions need to be reviewed and enhanced to be more supportive of implementing school behavior policies. Full training in all BEP, Code of Conduct and Rest Justice practices are a priority. There physical presence in schools has to be increased and all staff need to learn how to use them more effectively.
9. Develop an InterAgency agreement with the appropriate legal offices i.e. DA’s office, to refer students to alternative settings for any necessary and appropriate intervention to preclude any legal charges.
10. Create an ERO Advisory Committee composed of MMSD Staff, MPD, students and Community reps.
What we have heard from stakeholders and, particularly from students, is primarily three different opinions;
1. That some people believe that they provide a valuable service and should stay as is. The idea that ERO’s are essentially “Social workers with guns.”
2. That many students don’t have an opinion either way.
3. That there are definitely some of our students who, just by the mere presence of the
officers, feel unsafe and have difficulty relating to school as a result.
The data and testimony we have gathered did not show a convincing argument that the presence of ERO’s in our four high schools made a difference in student achievement or cultural/climate concerns. Many of us also rejected the idea that Social Workers should have weapons as a tool. Although having police officers make presentations in specific classes about how the police work in our community is a valid class topic of study and educational experience, we do not feel that having officers assigned to schools should in anyway be considered educational assets.
Indeed we also learned that there are strategies that can be used that are more effective when confronting an attacker and that tactically it is more suited to have responders come at the problem from the outside, especially where you have proper lock down procedures in place.
In the last several months we have again also experienced some high profile school shootings that have triggered a national conversation and also spurred a Wisconsin legislative response that provided funds to address what we know works to keep a building and our students safe; locked internal doors, secure windows, protective training for our staff and surveillance.
The legislation provided funding for those services and MMSD was awarded nearly $1m towards adding those resources. The legislation also required that each School District develop a Safety Plan for the entire District and each school within it and we have come to the conclusion that the ERO program should be eliminated as it exists currently and a larger Police Liaison Program be developed that can extend police services to the entire school district in conjunction with and following the practices provided by the District Safety Plan.
We envision a program that eliminates the need to replace existing ERO’s every three to five years which requires that MMSD allocate additional resources for on-going repetitive training that has to start over when a new ERO is assigned and replacing it with 20 or more Liaison officers who will receive ongoing training in school policies that can maintain regular contact with all of our schools as opposed to just the four high schools and respond to emergencies if needed. These officers will have relationships with our
schools for their entire careers and will also be able to develop relationships with our students just as our more exceptional ERO’s do now.
These officers will not be permanently stationed in a school but have regular contact with all of our schools providing valuable current updates and information and will have received extra training about school behavior policies and appropriate interactions with
students. We would envision that each school has designated contacts at the Principal level so that when an officer is needed clear lines of communication are in place to ensure that the presence of the officers who responds will not automatically escalate a potentially volatile situation.
Contract Scope of Services: Suggested changes to contract language.
IID:
“Consistent with the forgoing, the Parties shall cooperate and coordinate responses to and investigations of incidents in their mutual interest and promptly debrief all critical incidents or incidents in which the ERO has used force against a student or staff member” to read “Consistent with the forgoing, the Parties shall cooperate and coordinate responses to and investigations of incidents in their mutual interest and promptly debrief all incidents or incidents in which the ERO interacted with student or staff member in the capacity of a Police Officer, and/or where an ERO has interacted with a student or staff member due to the suspicion of an infraction and/or due to an actual infraction.”
IIIA.
– 1. “Conduct initial investigation into criminal and ordinance violations occurring on
campus and take appropriate enforcement actions” should read “Conduct initial investigations into criminal, and only criminal, violations occurring on campus and consult with school officials on the best course of action in determining what would constitute appropriate enforcement actions.”
– 2. “Act as liaison with local law enforcement agencies to exchange basic information concerning students consistent with state and federal laws, and to provide assistance to law enforcement agencies as well as the principal in matters relating to delinquent and criminal activities associated with students who attend the school in the MMSD.” should read “Act as liaison with local law enforcement agencies to exchange basic information concerning students consistent with state and federal laws, and to provide assistance to law enforcement agencies as well as the principal in matters relating to criminal activities associated with students who attend the school in the MMSD.”
– 3. “Work with school administration to identify conditions which could be harmful to the welfare of students and the safety of the school environment and address those conditions.” should read “Work with school administration to identify conditions which could be harmful to the welfare of students and the safety of the school environment and address those conditions in accordance with an agreement made between the school administration, social workers, and within the regulations and requirements set forth by the student bill of rights.”
IIIB.
– 2. STRIKE; replace with “EROs should not be the primary counsel for students on
understanding laws, ordinances and the juvenile code. These trainings and educational
modules should be conducted by legal professionals (lawyers) and not EROs.”
IIIE.
– 2. “Supporting and reinforcing the implementation of school policies and rules using
appropriate, available educational resources and intervention techniques” should be stricken under the provisions if the revised section IIIA under the scope of services, and replaced with “EROs actions should be limited to criminal acts and EROs should not be enforcing school policies, or be primarily directed to school sites to address ordinance violations, and should not be utilized or instructed by the school staff to enforce school policies or rules. In the event that an ERO come into contact with a student or a student’s
family on MMSD property, EROs shall utilize Restorative Practices and/or Youth and
Community Courts in lieu of issuing citations or arrest warrants.”
– III
Add: “If EROs are involved with any student or student’s family in the conduct of
their official duties (limited to addressing criminal activities), any such involvement should be reported to MMSD officials. This should include but not be limited to incidents where EROs used force, or to incidents that are deemed critical.”
