Elrich Leads MoCo CE Polls by Large Margin
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}
Anonymous
What I hate most about this is that Elrich, Jawando, and Riemer have painted MCPD as the enemy and as something to be feared. They’ve used bad policing elsewhere to justify their hatred of our local police, a department that is professional, hard-working, and a good model of a strong police department. (Don’t come at me about the two police who yelled at the child. They are outliers and not the norm here.) Salaries and morale have plummeted, which is directly attributed to them. Their anti-police rhetoric also causes a rift between the police and the community. I can’t imagine voting for any of them. |
Anonymous
This is an incredible lie. Absolutely Trumpian levels of lying here. Everyone can read the Washington Post. “Council members Will Jawando (D-At Large) and Hans Riemer (D-At Large) introduced a bill Tuesday that would prohibit the county police chief from implementing the school resource officer (SRO) program, which places armed officers in most public high schools and some middle schools in the county of 1 million people.” https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/md-politics/montgomery-school-resource-officers/2020/11/17/6ad7d0ba-284f-11eb-9b14-ad872157ebc9_story.html |
Anonymous
Do you know the difference between a bill that was introduced and a bill that was passed and enacted. Please quit posting until you do. That bill never went anywhere. |
Anonymous
You are so mendacious it has to be Riemer himself posting. That bill was was rightly considered too irresponsible by the council and was replaced by a compromise bill put forward by Navarro that created the CEO program. The is no way for any other interpretation of events that the council, led by Riemer and Jawando, ended the SRO program. To argue otherwise is a Big Lie and makes you pretty pathetic. |
Anonymous
They did that, and I never said they didn't. But since they weren't enacted, they were not the causal factor in the SRO removal. Marc Elrich alone made that decision. Period. |
Anonymous
| Mayor Eldrich has been the best leader of the county we have had in my 27 years living here. I firmly believe he is the man for the job leading us into the 21st century |
Anonymous
The mendacity continues. Absent Jawando and Riemers “leadership”, eg publicity stunt, SROs would have never been removed. Period. Riemer himself takes credit for it and he was clear that he was even unhappy with the CEO program. So if anything, Elrich’s biggest mistake was acceding to extremist pressure, but he didn’t even go as far as Riemer and Jawando wanted him to. There is a true story about removal of SROs and there are lies. You want to tell lies and I am going to keep letting you know. [twitter] https://mobile.twitter.com/hansriemer/status/1392982579867947008[/twitter] |
Anonymous
Riemer is lying there. The budget removed 5 SRO positions that had never been filled. So it didn't involve anyone actually assigned to a school. They had been put in the budget by Craig Rice and unanimously voted on by the full Council a few years ago, before SSJC backlash about SROs. It takes 18 months to 2 years, though, to hire and train officers, and they felt they had to amend the MOU to ensure appropriate interaction with a younger student group. Riemer and Jawando want them removed. Jawando still does. But again, the actual governmental action that removed them was Elrich. He didn't even bother to wait for the MCPS study of the program. |
Anonymous
|
There is one reconciliation list item there for 2 SROs in 2019. Unanimous vote.
https://www.montgomerycountymd.gov/council/Resources/Files/agenda/col/2019/20190516/20190516_2B.pdf And three in 2018. Riemer was Council President. https://www2.montgomerycountymd.gov/mcgportalapps/Press_Detail.aspx?Item_ID=22155&Dept=1 |
Anonymous
What does this mean? The sequence of events are: - For years everyone supports SROs and raises no reservations. 2019: Elrich proposes in his to add SROs to Middle Schools but council doesn’t support 2020: Riemer and Jawando decide that it would be politically expedient to campaign to remove SROs 2021: - Riemer and Jawando propose bill to prevent MCPD from placing SROs in school - Navarro and Rice propose compromise for “CROs” outside schools - Elrich takes cue from the majority of the council and proposes budget with “CEOs” outside schools - Riemer is satisfied with compromise on his original proposal but certainly didn’t want CROs/CEOs either - Jawando, who also proposed to defund MCPD, stated that he was “proud of the work we did” to achieve this outcome 2022: - Elrich says he still support removing SROs - McKnight says that the SRO program was a failure and they won’t return - Jawando and Riemer have gone into hiding Fin |
Anonymous
|
Oh wait, forgot that Jawando and Riemer first proposed a bill to eliminate half of the SRO positions in 2020 and the council voted it down 5-4, with both Rice and Navarro opposed. So the Navarro and Rice “compromise” represented a clear supermajority of the council.
There was also the MCPS “review” in 2020-2021 that did what MCPS does best, published misleading information that ultimately supported ending the program. |
Anonymous
Not quite right, although I love your characterization of 2022.  There are three different government players in this mess. And ultimately Elrich has and had the final word on it all:
2018 and 2019 Everyone supported SROs without reservation up through 2020. Schools, police, government officials. Craig Rice most of all. During the budget process, Council added 5 SROs for middle schools over two years, at Council Member Rice's urging. These had not been proposed by Leggett or Elrich. 2020 March - the executive got a state grant to add a couple million dollars to the SRO program and a bunch of advocates testified against it at Council. That's when the anti-SRO backlash began and several Councilmembers started changing their mind. May - George Floyd was killed. June - the Board of Education passed a resolution to reexamine the SRO program. Jack Smith had to provide a bunch of data. https://wtop.com/maryland/2020/06/2-maryland-counties-debate-role-of-school-resource-officers/ The results kept getting postponed. July - during a savings plan, Jawando wanted to get rid of the entire SRO program and thought it would save money. He said it would be $3 million or something people could use to fund mental health in the schools. But there was no savings. https://bethesdamagazine.com/bethesda-beat/government/council-committee-rebuffs-jawandos-call-to-eliminate-school-resource-officers/ And the Council didn't take his recommendation. November - he and Riemer introduced a bill to prohibit SROs in schools. Navarro proposed an amendment to modify the program in a way that is very similar to what Elrich later implemented. December - Rice and Katz introduced a bill to allow the school system to decide whether it wants SROs. Neither was passed. 2021 March - as part of the next budget, the executive cut those original 5 SROs in the budget. Those had never been assigned because it takes a couple of years to hire a police officer. And the Council voted to approve that. During press conferences, Elrich also announced his intention to end the SRO program. It was confusing though, because he did it as part of his press statement on the budget. Rich Madaleno, the county’s chief administrative officer, wrote in a text message Monday night that Elrich’s proposed budget for fiscal year 2022 includes eliminating five vacant school resource officer positions from middle schools. Elrich’s plan for the future of the full SRO program is “not from the budget,” he said. https://bethesdamagazine.com/bethesda-beat/schools/elrich-says-he-will-remove-police-officers-from-schools/ May - the Board of Education released its findings about the SRO program, citing advantages and disadvantages, and that if a school system had SROs it should tailor it to both reduce harm of arrests and increase safety. https://go.boarddocs.com/mabe/mcpsmd/Board.nsf/files/C2S2RR727C3F/$file/SRO%20Program%20210511.pdf (Personally, I think the board did the research and outreach the right way. They really took an objective look at all different aspects of the program and solicited input from principals, students, police, teachers, parents. That's how it should be done. I wish they would take some of that information and those recommendations, and put some sort of SRO program back in schools, with the accountability and harm reduction components that they had discussed.) Summer - Over that spring and summer, the various stakeholders created two groups, one mostly students and one mostly school and police administrators, to develop a better MOU saying what police would do. September - schools opened with no SROs on school property. They were CEOs. They responded to crimes. So the model Elrich called for actually took out all the good parts of the SRO program, like relationship building and violence PREVENTION, and left the bad stuff that people hate, the ARRESTS. |
Anonymous
|
So you don’t think it’s of any consequence to the Executives proposed budget that a supermajority of the council (Jawando, Riemer, Glass, Hucker, Navarro, Rice, Katz) and MCPS were in favor of removing SROs from schools?
While instead, Elrich’s more natural constituents, public sector employees (police and teachers/principals) were in favor of keeping them? It’s fascinating that you recognize all of this and yet find the only person responsible to be Elrich. Meanwhile McKnight has been very clear and the most vocal that MCPS doesn’t want them. Both Jawando and Riemer have been very clear, absent their actions on the council, SROs would still be in schools. We should believe them and the record supports that. |
Anonymous
So the Council is in charge of Elrich? He certainly never fell in line with Council when he was on Council, and most of the Council really dislikes him. And vice versa. It's not an either/or, here. But at the end of the day, Elrich pulled them and he can put them back the fastest, if that's what he chooses to do. Of course there were a lot of negative public conversations about SROs. But there was no super-majority opinion on Council. Katz certainly didn't want them gone. For the longest time, Rice didn't either, but he did flip last minute. Hucker was silent on the issue as far as I can tell. Same with Friedson. Not sure where Glass is on this issue. But I have a question, other than the past week or so after Magruder, where has Dr. McKnight vocally come out against the SRO program? Because I can't find anything other than her speaking about how they are moving forward with the changed model. Not anti-SRO so much as explaining the new approach. |
Anonymous
Great timeline. Riemer opposed all models for the SRO program, from Twitter (with his usual lies about what Elrich proposed): Riemer, March 5 2021: "The Elrich proposed approach to police officers in schools is to have them drive from school to school rather than being stationed in the school. I don’t see how that is a change." Riemer is curiously silent about SROs now. |