Please complete MCPS surveys

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Difference between CEO and SRO? What other ideas have been entertained by MCPS in the past - metal detectors etc?

The only difference is SROs had no backup, no office and assigned 1 school.

The CEO program fixed that.

Also SROs would get involved in disciplinary issues like chewing gum, now they can only get involved in criminal activity.

I know many SROs and they are happy to be cops instead of disciplinarian… a job they are not trained to do,

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Difference between CEO and SRO? What other ideas have been entertained by MCPS in the past - metal detectors etc?

I don't understand this either.

SRO used to be stationed in the schools and was a resource for school admin who could intervene in a number of student-related incidents.

Post-George Floyd, Jawando and Elrich felt SROs were a form of oppression for black and brown students, so they ejected them from the schools over the objections of every middle and high school principal. They then backtracked somewhat and offered up a new name for them: Community Engagement Officers (CEO). Along with the new name, CEOs were no longer attached to a single school and were no longer in the building. Instead, they serve a network of schools on an on-call, as needed basis.

As you can imagine, when you go from a dedicated resource to a shared one, it hasn't worked out so well and a number of people within the MCPS community are demanding a return to the SRO model instead.

CEOs are in the building and have an office so they don’t have to write reports in their car.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Difference between CEO and SRO? What other ideas have been entertained by MCPS in the past - metal detectors etc?

I don't understand this either.

SRO used to be stationed in the schools and was a resource for school admin who could intervene in a number of student-related incidents.

Post-George Floyd, Jawando and Elrich felt SROs were a form of oppression for black and brown students, so they ejected them from the schools over the objections of every middle and high school principal. They then backtracked somewhat and offered up a new name for them: Community Engagement Officers (CEO). Along with the new name, CEOs were no longer attached to a single school and were no longer in the building. Instead, they serve a network of schools on an on-call, as needed basis.

As you can imagine, when you go from a dedicated resource to a shared one, it hasn't worked out so well and a number of people within the MCPS community are demanding a return to the SRO model instead.

CEOs are in the building and have an office so they don’t have to write reports in their car.

That's what they say but this is not the reality in every MCPS high school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Difference between CEO and SRO? What other ideas have been entertained by MCPS in the past - metal detectors etc?

I don't understand this either.

SRO used to be stationed in the schools and was a resource for school admin who could intervene in a number of student-related incidents.

Post-George Floyd, Jawando and Elrich felt SROs were a form of oppression for black and brown students, so they ejected them from the schools over the objections of every middle and high school principal. They then backtracked somewhat and offered up a new name for them: Community Engagement Officers (CEO). Along with the new name, CEOs were no longer attached to a single school and were no longer in the building. Instead, they serve a network of schools on an on-call, as needed basis.

As you can imagine, when you go from a dedicated resource to a shared one, it hasn't worked out so well and a number of people within the MCPS community are demanding a return to the SRO model instead.

CEOs are in the building and have an office so they don’t have to write reports in their car.

That's what they say but this is not the reality in every MCPS high school.

Yes it is.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I definitely wrote in to bring back SRO. People opposing this are delusional.

They are white liberals who have deluded themselves into believing getting rid of police is helping black and brown kids. Newsflash: It's not.

This is why I hate white liberals in this area. So much virtue signaling with such little substance.

Nobody has gotten rid of any cops.

In name, no, but in practice, yes.

The shared model means most kids never know or see the CEO assigned to their school. And because they're shared, when multiple calls happen concurrently, then schools are left to fend for themselves, which is what happened with BCC recently when a fight broke out and the CEO was called but couldn't respond because they were attending to another call at the time, which resulted in the principal and head of security getting roughed up in the scuffle.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Difference between CEO and SRO? What other ideas have been entertained by MCPS in the past - metal detectors etc?

I don't understand this either.

SRO used to be stationed in the schools and was a resource for school admin who could intervene in a number of student-related incidents.

Post-George Floyd, Jawando and Elrich felt SROs were a form of oppression for black and brown students, so they ejected them from the schools over the objections of every middle and high school principal. They then backtracked somewhat and offered up a new name for them: Community Engagement Officers (CEO). Along with the new name, CEOs were no longer attached to a single school and were no longer in the building. Instead, they serve a network of schools on an on-call, as needed basis.

As you can imagine, when you go from a dedicated resource to a shared one, it hasn't worked out so well and a number of people within the MCPS community are demanding a return to the SRO model instead.

CEOs are in the building and have an office so they don’t have to write reports in their car.

That's what they say but this is not the reality in every MCPS high school.

Yes it is.

No, it's not.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Thanks OP. Just completed and wrote in my strong opposition to having any cops in schools.

I wrote my strong preference for them because they make my child feel safer.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I definitely wrote in to bring back SRO. People opposing this are delusional.

They are white liberals who have deluded themselves into believing getting rid of police is helping black and brown kids. Newsflash: It's not.

This is why I hate white liberals in this area. So much virtue signaling with such little substance.

Nobody has gotten rid of any cops.

In name, no, but in practice, yes.

The shared model means most kids never know or see the CEO assigned to their school. And because they're shared, when multiple calls happen concurrently, then schools are left to fend for themselves, which is what happened with BCC recently when a fight broke out and the CEO was called but couldn't respond because they were attending to another call at the time, which resulted in the principal and head of security getting roughed up in the scuffle.

One CEO assigned to multiple schools? What kind of a zero-ass solution is that? You need at least a handful for each school where population is in the thousands. Have you seen the height and strength of some of the high school students?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Difference between CEO and SRO? What other ideas have been entertained by MCPS in the past - metal detectors etc?

I don't understand this either.

SRO used to be stationed in the schools and was a resource for school admin who could intervene in a number of student-related incidents.

Post-George Floyd, Jawando and Elrich felt SROs were a form of oppression for black and brown students, so they ejected them from the schools over the objections of every middle and high school principal. They then backtracked somewhat and offered up a new name for them: Community Engagement Officers (CEO). Along with the new name, CEOs were no longer attached to a single school and were no longer in the building. Instead, they serve a network of schools on an on-call, as needed basis.

As you can imagine, when you go from a dedicated resource to a shared one, it hasn't worked out so well and a number of people within the MCPS community are demanding a return to the SRO model instead.

CEOs are in the building and have an office so they don’t have to write reports in their car.

That's what they say but this is not the reality in every MCPS high school.

Yes it is.

No, it's not.

So. Confused. Can someone please tell the truth please?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I definitely wrote in to bring back SRO. People opposing this are delusional.

They are white liberals who have deluded themselves into believing getting rid of police is helping black and brown kids. Newsflash: It's not.

This is why I hate white liberals in this area. So much virtue signaling with such little substance.

Nobody has gotten rid of any cops.

In name, no, but in practice, yes.

The shared model means most kids never know or see the CEO assigned to their school. And because they're shared, when multiple calls happen concurrently, then schools are left to fend for themselves, which is what happened with BCC recently when a fight broke out and the CEO was called but couldn't respond because they were attending to another call at the time, which resulted in the principal and head of security getting roughed up in the scuffle.

One CEO assigned to multiple schools? What kind of a zero-ass solution is that? You need at least a handful for each school where population is in the thousands. Have you seen the height and strength of some of the high school students?

They are assigned to each cluster, so there is one CEO per cluster.

But in reality, officers may be out on vacation or sick leave, or their shift may end before the school day, etc. So not every high school has a CEO available at every moment. But the model is that there are 25 CEOs coming from MCPD, the sheriff's office and I think Rockville City PD. Each is assigned to a cluster, so they are addressing issues at the high school as well as at the other schools. I actually think that approach is good because there are plenty of things happening at middle schools. Personally, I'd like to see a handful of floater CEOs to support groups of schools, so maybe an additional 5 who would be assigned to the DCC, NEC, Upcounty, etc. Their focus could be on community issues and things that cross school boundaries. But that's in a dream world where there isn't an officer shortage.

[Anonymous]

And if a CEO isn't available, another officer (s) should be dispatched in an emergency situation, so the lack of response at BCC is an issue but not related to CEO vs. SRO.

In reality, with SROs there were days they were on leave or in court or whatever, too. It's impossible to be present at all times.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I definitely wrote in to bring back SRO. People opposing this are delusional.

They are white liberals who have deluded themselves into believing getting rid of police is helping black and brown kids. Newsflash: It's not.

This is why I hate white liberals in this area. So much virtue signaling with such little substance.

Nobody has gotten rid of any cops.

In name, no, but in practice, yes.

The shared model means most kids never know or see the CEO assigned to their school. And because they're shared, when multiple calls happen concurrently, then schools are left to fend for themselves, which is what happened with BCC recently when a fight broke out and the CEO was called but couldn't respond because they were attending to another call at the time, which resulted in the principal and head of security getting roughed up in the scuffle.

One CEO assigned to multiple schools? What kind of a zero-ass solution is that? You need at least a handful for each school where population is in the thousands. Have you seen the height and strength of some of the high school students?

They are assigned to each cluster, so there is one CEO per cluster.

But in reality, officers may be out on vacation or sick leave, or their shift may end before the school day, etc. So not every high school has a CEO available at every moment. But the model is that there are 25 CEOs coming from MCPD, the sheriff's office and I think Rockville City PD. Each is assigned to a cluster, so they are addressing issues at the high school as well as at the other schools. I actually think that approach is good because there are plenty of things happening at middle schools. Personally, I'd like to see a handful of floater CEOs to support groups of schools, so maybe an additional 5 who would be assigned to the DCC, NEC, Upcounty, etc. Their focus could be on community issues and things that cross school boundaries. But that's in a dream world where there isn't an officer shortage.

One per cluster is an insane and unrealistic model. Maybe it could work with 2-3, and given that they're pulling from three police agencies, I don't see why that can't be the case? Even if they can't do it for every cluster, definitely to the ones that need more as you pointed out like the DCC and NEC would be a good start.

[Anonymous]

We can argue which cluster needs more but reality is All of them need more. With 20+ bathrooms one could be stationed in each hall. What about a school's security guard team? How many security guards are at each HS and MS? Can schools add more guards? Is there a shortage of guards?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I definitely wrote in to bring back SRO. People opposing this are delusional.

They are white liberals who have deluded themselves into believing getting rid of police is helping black and brown kids. Newsflash: It's not.

This is why I hate white liberals in this area. So much virtue signaling with such little substance.

Nobody has gotten rid of any cops.

In name, no, but in practice, yes.

The shared model means most kids never know or see the CEO assigned to their school. And because they're shared, when multiple calls happen concurrently, then schools are left to fend for themselves, which is what happened with BCC recently when a fight broke out and the CEO was called but couldn't respond because they were attending to another call at the time, which resulted in the principal and head of security getting roughed up in the scuffle.

One CEO assigned to multiple schools? What kind of a zero-ass solution is that? You need at least a handful for each school where population is in the thousands. Have you seen the height and strength of some of the high school students?

They are assigned to each cluster, so there is one CEO per cluster.

But in reality, officers may be out on vacation or sick leave, or their shift may end before the school day, etc. So not every high school has a CEO available at every moment. But the model is that there are 25 CEOs coming from MCPD, the sheriff's office and I think Rockville City PD. Each is assigned to a cluster, so they are addressing issues at the high school as well as at the other schools. I actually think that approach is good because there are plenty of things happening at middle schools. Personally, I'd like to see a handful of floater CEOs to support groups of schools, so maybe an additional 5 who would be assigned to the DCC, NEC, Upcounty, etc. Their focus could be on community issues and things that cross school boundaries. But that's in a dream world where there isn't an officer shortage.

One per cluster is an insane and unrealistic model. Maybe it could work with 2-3, and given that they're pulling from three police agencies, I don't see why that can't be the case? Even if they can't do it for every cluster, definitely to the ones that need more as you pointed out like the DCC and NEC would be a good start.

With what officers, though? There are shortages across the county. And though they pull from three (maybe Park Police, too?) agencies, I think it's one Rockville PD officer and 2 from the sheriff's office, though I don't remember the exact numbers. Police capacity across agencies is down, so finding another 25 would be impossible.

[Anonymous]

Listen to WAMU now to hear a MoCo Council member.