Petition to bring back SROs

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Thanks for the taking points posted by a PP—very helpful. Condensing, it sounds like there are three major differences with the old SRO program:
— CEOs have a designated work station at the HS but are not stationed there (unclear what this means in practice but I’d guess it means they need to at least report to shift at police station)
— ceos not allowed to patrol hallways or respond to school incidents (unclear what that means—if a security officer says “there are kids using drugs in the bathroom and they are refusing to disperse” can the CEO assist?)
— unlike SROs, ceos do not have primary response for arson or drug distribution. Unclear to me who does have primary response for that….McPS security? Principals?
Taking the second two things in combination, it appears that MCPD no longer has any role in making sure kids aren’t using or selling drugs in schools. That seems to me not ideal.

#1 SRO’s had no place to sit so they had to wonder the halls or sit in their car to write a report. Now they have an office.

#2 means that if a teacher is dealing with a disciplinary issue a cop can’t get involved. Often SRO’s would escalate a simple disciplinary issue that teachers were able to handle and teachers did not feel like they could tell a cop to butt out. SROs now only respond to crimes.

#3 arsons are investigated by fire Marshall’s not cops. The Bethesda mag article explains the “drug” response.

#4 no it not true that cops are not involved in drug enforcement for distribution and dangerous drugs. Anything that is a non criminal drug charge in Montgomery County (aka possession of a small amount of pot or paraphernalia ) will now be dealt with by MCPS discipline .

#1. Our SROs always were given a place to work. They walked the halls, but they also had a “home” for work.

#2. SROs did not step in when I was dealing with discipline in my classroom. They didn’t do that to my colleagues, either. Why? Because, as you said, that would escalate the issue and the teacher would loose authority. So, clearly, SROs did not do this. Where are you coming up with this? This isn’t how SROs operated at. all.

I’d love to know where you got these beliefs.

#1 not all schools are the same

#2 most complaints came from teachers in ED classrooms. Are you an ED teacher? I’m glad you agree that SRO’s should not get involved with discipline. That change must please you. It’s explained in the Bethesda magazine article.

Yes, I have worked with ED students in all of my classes. Good attempt at twisting my words, but I can handle discipline in my own classroom while simultaneously being supported by the work of an SRO. There are times I am not equipped to handle a situation, like the weapon that was found in my classroom. I should NOT be expected to handle situations like that, and I should absolutely have the support an an SRO in those cases. The current CEO model doesn’t place the officer close to my classroom, nor does that officer know my children. This is a worse situation. You are welcome to spin it any way you like, of course, but it won’t match my reality nor that of many others with actual experience with SROs.

A weapon would be a crime and a CEO would be involved. CEO’s are in the school and if you have not been given instructions on how to ask for a response you need to reach out to your principal.

How did you call for the SRO?

Quietly simply texted the main office and he was at my door in less than 2 minutes. Since a CEO could be anywhere in a cluster, I doubt I’ll get the same response next time. Also, the SRO already had an established relationship with the student, so the student willingly left the classroom and talked to the trusted officer. A CEO won’t have the same type of relationship.

Again: I come from a place of experience and understanding.

The new model will be that you can call the CEO directly but that part has not been implemented yet.

If you can’t text your front office and get the CEO you should report that. Starting Fall 21 CEO’s were back in schools the same way SRO were. Also students can approach CEO’s if they want. CEO’s are just not allowed to create fake relationship with students to purposely narc on them to investigators they have to live by the same privacy rules teachers do unless it’s a criminal investigation.

Again: I have a very novel experience with security in schools as well as cities, events, sports events, and govt buildings.

You say you have experience with “security,” not with SROs. Your language also shows extreme bias (“fake relationships,” “purposefully narc”). The combination of the two demonstrates we have nothing further to discuss.

I’ve worked with too many amazing SROs to entertain this any further.

Please explain to me how the SROs on site at parkland and uvalde helped?

It's well known that SROs do almost nothing for school safety and in many cases have made matters worse.

Again you keep saying this, but post no evidence of how this applies to Montgomery County, or even Maryland. What incidents in Montgomery County can you refer to in which having the SROs have made matters worse?

It was shown that SROs created many false arrests and provided bad information to investigators. They will no longer be used in this capacity.

Source please? The fact is only 3% of incidents that were handled by SROs in MCPS resulted in an arrest.

That doesn’t count the arrests made by investigators with SRO information..

Also why don’t they publicize how many of those arrests were false?

How is that different from arrests made from teacher/staff/administration information?

Its extra staff in the schools that MCPS isn't paying for as it comes out of police funding not MCPS.

What is your solution? You have yet to give us any. Incidents are up.

The solution is that cops are only called when there is a crime.

When there is no crime (which is 97% of the time) it is referred to MCPS disciplinary proceedings.

That should free cops up for law enforcement.

They are not a concierge service.

So, you have no solution to keeping our kids safe in MCPS. Why wait till a crime happens when it could possibly be prevented? You want your child raped, beaten, etc. when if a SRO was there to prevent it, it could save them from a lot of pain and trauma. Or, are you one of those people with magical thinking that nothing bad could ever happen to you?

Definitely need to keep out the SROs if you are concerned about kid safety. Just can't help but think about Tyre Nichols.

I think this is what it boils down to. Some of the posters don’t want Police trying to build relationship with the community or the kids because the distrust is so high they only see officers trying to take advantage. Other posters see a benefit to officers that know the kids as people not just perps, and see relationships as a way to funnel information to officers to prevent crime (not just to snitch on other kids to get them into trouble). I think the former group feels like you never go to law enforcement unless you really have no choice because the risks of interacting with law enfocrement put weight the be benefits.
I really would love for McPS to do an anonymous survey, linked to student IDs (which also means it could be sorted by school and demographics like the PArc scores) that asked whether parents support SROs in schools. I really would like to see the results of that. I really don’t know what those results would look like. Then they should do the same with teachers and counselors.

I would like to know how many parents had to hire a lawyer for the 97 % of interaction that never needed a cop.

I’d like to know how often SRO’s provided bad info to investigators based on their bias.

DP.
We are still waiting for a poster above to provide that data for us. I’ve asked twice now.

You think mc police and the state’s attorney office will share that.

But you don’t care because it wasn’t your child.

I’m a teacher. I do care about my “children.” I’ve taught over 2,700. I’d care quite deeply to hear if something like this has happened to one of them. Don’t try that character attack on me.

Well it happens and it’s traumatic. It’s literally trauma. What HS are you in that you don’t know this happens.

I don’t discredit the idea this has happened somewhere to someone, and I would agree would be traumatic. Was this in MCPS? Poor behavior on the part of an SRO would NOT be tolerated. I posted a link above that shows how many people one SRO reports to, what type of training they do so they can be sensitive to teen needs, etc.

As for what school, I’m not putting that online. I will say that I’ve seen so many positive interactions. My students have even asked the SRO to sit in on class briefly, or sit with them for a bit at lunch. What I’ve seen is students form strong relationships, and I’ve seen them value the SRO as a trusted adult in the building. I watched one of my 12th graders actively seek him out to talk after a bad weekend. I watched another get excited to see the SRO at his evening game. I have dozens of stories like these. Dozens.

Yes it’s MCPS, yes it’s everywhere.

What do you think happens with those 200+ reports to SRO’s that ended up being nothing? How many weren’t reported? Have you ever seen what a criminal investigation looks like? Have you heard of cops interrogating kids without parental consent? Didn’t that happen in the Damascus case? What about the false Seneca Valley accusations? Do you know how many innocent Northwest kids had to get lawyers during that investigation which ended up not even being a student?

Really that’s just a few examples.

Nobody is stopping a student reaching out to a CEO. But they hope to stop the false criminal complaints.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Thanks for the taking points posted by a PP—very helpful. Condensing, it sounds like there are three major differences with the old SRO program:
— CEOs have a designated work station at the HS but are not stationed there (unclear what this means in practice but I’d guess it means they need to at least report to shift at police station)
— ceos not allowed to patrol hallways or respond to school incidents (unclear what that means—if a security officer says “there are kids using drugs in the bathroom and they are refusing to disperse” can the CEO assist?)
— unlike SROs, ceos do not have primary response for arson or drug distribution. Unclear to me who does have primary response for that….McPS security? Principals?
Taking the second two things in combination, it appears that MCPD no longer has any role in making sure kids aren’t using or selling drugs in schools. That seems to me not ideal.

#1 SRO’s had no place to sit so they had to wonder the halls or sit in their car to write a report. Now they have an office.

#2 means that if a teacher is dealing with a disciplinary issue a cop can’t get involved. Often SRO’s would escalate a simple disciplinary issue that teachers were able to handle and teachers did not feel like they could tell a cop to butt out. SROs now only respond to crimes.

#3 arsons are investigated by fire Marshall’s not cops. The Bethesda mag article explains the “drug” response.

#4 no it not true that cops are not involved in drug enforcement for distribution and dangerous drugs. Anything that is a non criminal drug charge in Montgomery County (aka possession of a small amount of pot or paraphernalia ) will now be dealt with by MCPS discipline .

#1. Our SROs always were given a place to work. They walked the halls, but they also had a “home” for work.

#2. SROs did not step in when I was dealing with discipline in my classroom. They didn’t do that to my colleagues, either. Why? Because, as you said, that would escalate the issue and the teacher would loose authority. So, clearly, SROs did not do this. Where are you coming up with this? This isn’t how SROs operated at. all.

I’d love to know where you got these beliefs.

#1 not all schools are the same

#2 most complaints came from teachers in ED classrooms. Are you an ED teacher? I’m glad you agree that SRO’s should not get involved with discipline. That change must please you. It’s explained in the Bethesda magazine article.

Yes, I have worked with ED students in all of my classes. Good attempt at twisting my words, but I can handle discipline in my own classroom while simultaneously being supported by the work of an SRO. There are times I am not equipped to handle a situation, like the weapon that was found in my classroom. I should NOT be expected to handle situations like that, and I should absolutely have the support an an SRO in those cases. The current CEO model doesn’t place the officer close to my classroom, nor does that officer know my children. This is a worse situation. You are welcome to spin it any way you like, of course, but it won’t match my reality nor that of many others with actual experience with SROs.

A weapon would be a crime and a CEO would be involved. CEO’s are in the school and if you have not been given instructions on how to ask for a response you need to reach out to your principal.

How did you call for the SRO?

Quietly simply texted the main office and he was at my door in less than 2 minutes. Since a CEO could be anywhere in a cluster, I doubt I’ll get the same response next time. Also, the SRO already had an established relationship with the student, so the student willingly left the classroom and talked to the trusted officer. A CEO won’t have the same type of relationship.

Again: I come from a place of experience and understanding.

The new model will be that you can call the CEO directly but that part has not been implemented yet.

If you can’t text your front office and get the CEO you should report that. Starting Fall 21 CEO’s were back in schools the same way SRO were. Also students can approach CEO’s if they want. CEO’s are just not allowed to create fake relationship with students to purposely narc on them to investigators they have to live by the same privacy rules teachers do unless it’s a criminal investigation.

Again: I have a very novel experience with security in schools as well as cities, events, sports events, and govt buildings.

You say you have experience with “security,” not with SROs. Your language also shows extreme bias (“fake relationships,” “purposefully narc”). The combination of the two demonstrates we have nothing further to discuss.

I’ve worked with too many amazing SROs to entertain this any further.

Please explain to me how the SROs on site at parkland and uvalde helped?

It's well known that SROs do almost nothing for school safety and in many cases have made matters worse.

Again you keep saying this, but post no evidence of how this applies to Montgomery County, or even Maryland. What incidents in Montgomery County can you refer to in which having the SROs have made matters worse?

It was shown that SROs created many false arrests and provided bad information to investigators. They will no longer be used in this capacity.

Source please? The fact is only 3% of incidents that were handled by SROs in MCPS resulted in an arrest.

That doesn’t count the arrests made by investigators with SRO information..

Also why don’t they publicize how many of those arrests were false?

How is that different from arrests made from teacher/staff/administration information?

Its extra staff in the schools that MCPS isn't paying for as it comes out of police funding not MCPS.

What is your solution? You have yet to give us any. Incidents are up.

The solution is that cops are only called when there is a crime.

When there is no crime (which is 97% of the time) it is referred to MCPS disciplinary proceedings.

That should free cops up for law enforcement.

They are not a concierge service.

So, you have no solution to keeping our kids safe in MCPS. Why wait till a crime happens when it could possibly be prevented? You want your child raped, beaten, etc. when if a SRO was there to prevent it, it could save them from a lot of pain and trauma. Or, are you one of those people with magical thinking that nothing bad could ever happen to you?

Definitely need to keep out the SROs if you are concerned about kid safety. Just can't help but think about Tyre Nichols.

I think this is what it boils down to. Some of the posters don’t want Police trying to build relationship with the community or the kids because the distrust is so high they only see officers trying to take advantage. Other posters see a benefit to officers that know the kids as people not just perps, and see relationships as a way to funnel information to officers to prevent crime (not just to snitch on other kids to get them into trouble). I think the former group feels like you never go to law enforcement unless you really have no choice because the risks of interacting with law enfocrement put weight the be benefits.
I really would love for McPS to do an anonymous survey, linked to student IDs (which also means it could be sorted by school and demographics like the PArc scores) that asked whether parents support SROs in schools. I really would like to see the results of that. I really don’t know what those results would look like. Then they should do the same with teachers and counselors.

I would like to know how many parents had to hire a lawyer for the 97 % of interaction that never needed a cop.

I’d like to know how often SRO’s provided bad info to investigators based on their bias.

DP.
We are still waiting for a poster above to provide that data for us. I’ve asked twice now.

You think mc police and the state’s attorney office will share that.

But you don’t care because it wasn’t your child.

I’m a teacher. I do care about my “children.” I’ve taught over 2,700. I’d care quite deeply to hear if something like this has happened to one of them. Don’t try that character attack on me.

Well it happens and it’s traumatic. It’s literally trauma. What HS are you in that you don’t know this happens.

I don’t discredit the idea this has happened somewhere to someone, and I would agree would be traumatic. Was this in MCPS? Poor behavior on the part of an SRO would NOT be tolerated. I posted a link above that shows how many people one SRO reports to, what type of training they do so they can be sensitive to teen needs, etc.

As for what school, I’m not putting that online. I will say that I’ve seen so many positive interactions. My students have even asked the SRO to sit in on class briefly, or sit with them for a bit at lunch. What I’ve seen is students form strong relationships, and I’ve seen them value the SRO as a trusted adult in the building. I watched one of my 12th graders actively seek him out to talk after a bad weekend. I watched another get excited to see the SRO at his evening game. I have dozens of stories like these. Dozens.

Genuine question: was there something about this person being an LEO that you think was integral to the students liking him? Would/could the same positive interactions occurred if it was an extra counselor or other admin?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Thanks for the taking points posted by a PP—very helpful. Condensing, it sounds like there are three major differences with the old SRO program:
— CEOs have a designated work station at the HS but are not stationed there (unclear what this means in practice but I’d guess it means they need to at least report to shift at police station)
— ceos not allowed to patrol hallways or respond to school incidents (unclear what that means—if a security officer says “there are kids using drugs in the bathroom and they are refusing to disperse” can the CEO assist?)
— unlike SROs, ceos do not have primary response for arson or drug distribution. Unclear to me who does have primary response for that….McPS security? Principals?
Taking the second two things in combination, it appears that MCPD no longer has any role in making sure kids aren’t using or selling drugs in schools. That seems to me not ideal.

#1 SRO’s had no place to sit so they had to wonder the halls or sit in their car to write a report. Now they have an office.

#2 means that if a teacher is dealing with a disciplinary issue a cop can’t get involved. Often SRO’s would escalate a simple disciplinary issue that teachers were able to handle and teachers did not feel like they could tell a cop to butt out. SROs now only respond to crimes.

#3 arsons are investigated by fire Marshall’s not cops. The Bethesda mag article explains the “drug” response.

#4 no it not true that cops are not involved in drug enforcement for distribution and dangerous drugs. Anything that is a non criminal drug charge in Montgomery County (aka possession of a small amount of pot or paraphernalia ) will now be dealt with by MCPS discipline .

#1. Our SROs always were given a place to work. They walked the halls, but they also had a “home” for work.

#2. SROs did not step in when I was dealing with discipline in my classroom. They didn’t do that to my colleagues, either. Why? Because, as you said, that would escalate the issue and the teacher would loose authority. So, clearly, SROs did not do this. Where are you coming up with this? This isn’t how SROs operated at. all.

I’d love to know where you got these beliefs.

#1 not all schools are the same

#2 most complaints came from teachers in ED classrooms. Are you an ED teacher? I’m glad you agree that SRO’s should not get involved with discipline. That change must please you. It’s explained in the Bethesda magazine article.

Yes, I have worked with ED students in all of my classes. Good attempt at twisting my words, but I can handle discipline in my own classroom while simultaneously being supported by the work of an SRO. There are times I am not equipped to handle a situation, like the weapon that was found in my classroom. I should NOT be expected to handle situations like that, and I should absolutely have the support an an SRO in those cases. The current CEO model doesn’t place the officer close to my classroom, nor does that officer know my children. This is a worse situation. You are welcome to spin it any way you like, of course, but it won’t match my reality nor that of many others with actual experience with SROs.

A weapon would be a crime and a CEO would be involved. CEO’s are in the school and if you have not been given instructions on how to ask for a response you need to reach out to your principal.

How did you call for the SRO?

Quietly simply texted the main office and he was at my door in less than 2 minutes. Since a CEO could be anywhere in a cluster, I doubt I’ll get the same response next time. Also, the SRO already had an established relationship with the student, so the student willingly left the classroom and talked to the trusted officer. A CEO won’t have the same type of relationship.

Again: I come from a place of experience and understanding.

The new model will be that you can call the CEO directly but that part has not been implemented yet.

If you can’t text your front office and get the CEO you should report that. Starting Fall 21 CEO’s were back in schools the same way SRO were. Also students can approach CEO’s if they want. CEO’s are just not allowed to create fake relationship with students to purposely narc on them to investigators they have to live by the same privacy rules teachers do unless it’s a criminal investigation.

Again: I have a very novel experience with security in schools as well as cities, events, sports events, and govt buildings.

You say you have experience with “security,” not with SROs. Your language also shows extreme bias (“fake relationships,” “purposefully narc”). The combination of the two demonstrates we have nothing further to discuss.

I’ve worked with too many amazing SROs to entertain this any further.

Please explain to me how the SROs on site at parkland and uvalde helped?

It's well known that SROs do almost nothing for school safety and in many cases have made matters worse.

Again you keep saying this, but post no evidence of how this applies to Montgomery County, or even Maryland. What incidents in Montgomery County can you refer to in which having the SROs have made matters worse?

It was shown that SROs created many false arrests and provided bad information to investigators. They will no longer be used in this capacity.

Source please? The fact is only 3% of incidents that were handled by SROs in MCPS resulted in an arrest.

That doesn’t count the arrests made by investigators with SRO information..

Also why don’t they publicize how many of those arrests were false?

How is that different from arrests made from teacher/staff/administration information?

Its extra staff in the schools that MCPS isn't paying for as it comes out of police funding not MCPS.

What is your solution? You have yet to give us any. Incidents are up.

The solution is that cops are only called when there is a crime.

When there is no crime (which is 97% of the time) it is referred to MCPS disciplinary proceedings.

That should free cops up for law enforcement.

They are not a concierge service.

So, you have no solution to keeping our kids safe in MCPS. Why wait till a crime happens when it could possibly be prevented? You want your child raped, beaten, etc. when if a SRO was there to prevent it, it could save them from a lot of pain and trauma. Or, are you one of those people with magical thinking that nothing bad could ever happen to you?

Definitely need to keep out the SROs if you are concerned about kid safety. Just can't help but think about Tyre Nichols.

I think this is what it boils down to. Some of the posters don’t want Police trying to build relationship with the community or the kids because the distrust is so high they only see officers trying to take advantage. Other posters see a benefit to officers that know the kids as people not just perps, and see relationships as a way to funnel information to officers to prevent crime (not just to snitch on other kids to get them into trouble). I think the former group feels like you never go to law enforcement unless you really have no choice because the risks of interacting with law enfocrement put weight the be benefits.
I really would love for McPS to do an anonymous survey, linked to student IDs (which also means it could be sorted by school and demographics like the PArc scores) that asked whether parents support SROs in schools. I really would like to see the results of that. I really don’t know what those results would look like. Then they should do the same with teachers and counselors.

I would like to know how many parents had to hire a lawyer for the 97 % of interaction that never needed a cop.

I’d like to know how often SRO’s provided bad info to investigators based on their bias.

DP.
We are still waiting for a poster above to provide that data for us. I’ve asked twice now.

You think mc police and the state’s attorney office will share that.

But you don’t care because it wasn’t your child.

I’m a teacher. I do care about my “children.” I’ve taught over 2,700. I’d care quite deeply to hear if something like this has happened to one of them. Don’t try that character attack on me.

Well it happens and it’s traumatic. It’s literally trauma. What HS are you in that you don’t know this happens.

I don’t discredit the idea this has happened somewhere to someone, and I would agree would be traumatic. Was this in MCPS? Poor behavior on the part of an SRO would NOT be tolerated. I posted a link above that shows how many people one SRO reports to, what type of training they do so they can be sensitive to teen needs, etc.

As for what school, I’m not putting that online. I will say that I’ve seen so many positive interactions. My students have even asked the SRO to sit in on class briefly, or sit with them for a bit at lunch. What I’ve seen is students form strong relationships, and I’ve seen them value the SRO as a trusted adult in the building. I watched one of my 12th graders actively seek him out to talk after a bad weekend. I watched another get excited to see the SRO at his evening game. I have dozens of stories like these. Dozens.

Genuine question: was there something about this person being an LEO that you think was integral to the students liking him? Would/could the same positive interactions occurred if it was an extra counselor or other admin?

^^^ This.

It’s such a bizarre notion that these students can’t find one person in the whole school to talk to about their bad weekend. What is up with that? That’s a serious problem.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Thanks for the taking points posted by a PP—very helpful. Condensing, it sounds like there are three major differences with the old SRO program:
— CEOs have a designated work station at the HS but are not stationed there (unclear what this means in practice but I’d guess it means they need to at least report to shift at police station)
— ceos not allowed to patrol hallways or respond to school incidents (unclear what that means—if a security officer says “there are kids using drugs in the bathroom and they are refusing to disperse” can the CEO assist?)
— unlike SROs, ceos do not have primary response for arson or drug distribution. Unclear to me who does have primary response for that….McPS security? Principals?
Taking the second two things in combination, it appears that MCPD no longer has any role in making sure kids aren’t using or selling drugs in schools. That seems to me not ideal.

#1 SRO’s had no place to sit so they had to wonder the halls or sit in their car to write a report. Now they have an office.

#2 means that if a teacher is dealing with a disciplinary issue a cop can’t get involved. Often SRO’s would escalate a simple disciplinary issue that teachers were able to handle and teachers did not feel like they could tell a cop to butt out. SROs now only respond to crimes.

#3 arsons are investigated by fire Marshall’s not cops. The Bethesda mag article explains the “drug” response.

#4 no it not true that cops are not involved in drug enforcement for distribution and dangerous drugs. Anything that is a non criminal drug charge in Montgomery County (aka possession of a small amount of pot or paraphernalia ) will now be dealt with by MCPS discipline .

#1. Our SROs always were given a place to work. They walked the halls, but they also had a “home” for work.

#2. SROs did not step in when I was dealing with discipline in my classroom. They didn’t do that to my colleagues, either. Why? Because, as you said, that would escalate the issue and the teacher would loose authority. So, clearly, SROs did not do this. Where are you coming up with this? This isn’t how SROs operated at. all.

I’d love to know where you got these beliefs.

#1 not all schools are the same

#2 most complaints came from teachers in ED classrooms. Are you an ED teacher? I’m glad you agree that SRO’s should not get involved with discipline. That change must please you. It’s explained in the Bethesda magazine article.

Yes, I have worked with ED students in all of my classes. Good attempt at twisting my words, but I can handle discipline in my own classroom while simultaneously being supported by the work of an SRO. There are times I am not equipped to handle a situation, like the weapon that was found in my classroom. I should NOT be expected to handle situations like that, and I should absolutely have the support an an SRO in those cases. The current CEO model doesn’t place the officer close to my classroom, nor does that officer know my children. This is a worse situation. You are welcome to spin it any way you like, of course, but it won’t match my reality nor that of many others with actual experience with SROs.

A weapon would be a crime and a CEO would be involved. CEO’s are in the school and if you have not been given instructions on how to ask for a response you need to reach out to your principal.

How did you call for the SRO?

Quietly simply texted the main office and he was at my door in less than 2 minutes. Since a CEO could be anywhere in a cluster, I doubt I’ll get the same response next time. Also, the SRO already had an established relationship with the student, so the student willingly left the classroom and talked to the trusted officer. A CEO won’t have the same type of relationship.

Again: I come from a place of experience and understanding.

The new model will be that you can call the CEO directly but that part has not been implemented yet.

If you can’t text your front office and get the CEO you should report that. Starting Fall 21 CEO’s were back in schools the same way SRO were. Also students can approach CEO’s if they want. CEO’s are just not allowed to create fake relationship with students to purposely narc on them to investigators they have to live by the same privacy rules teachers do unless it’s a criminal investigation.

Again: I have a very novel experience with security in schools as well as cities, events, sports events, and govt buildings.

You say you have experience with “security,” not with SROs. Your language also shows extreme bias (“fake relationships,” “purposefully narc”). The combination of the two demonstrates we have nothing further to discuss.

I’ve worked with too many amazing SROs to entertain this any further.

Please explain to me how the SROs on site at parkland and uvalde helped?

It's well known that SROs do almost nothing for school safety and in many cases have made matters worse.

Again you keep saying this, but post no evidence of how this applies to Montgomery County, or even Maryland. What incidents in Montgomery County can you refer to in which having the SROs have made matters worse?

It was shown that SROs created many false arrests and provided bad information to investigators. They will no longer be used in this capacity.

Source please? The fact is only 3% of incidents that were handled by SROs in MCPS resulted in an arrest.

That doesn’t count the arrests made by investigators with SRO information..

Also why don’t they publicize how many of those arrests were false?

How is that different from arrests made from teacher/staff/administration information?

Its extra staff in the schools that MCPS isn't paying for as it comes out of police funding not MCPS.

What is your solution? You have yet to give us any. Incidents are up.

The solution is that cops are only called when there is a crime.

When there is no crime (which is 97% of the time) it is referred to MCPS disciplinary proceedings.

That should free cops up for law enforcement.

They are not a concierge service.

So, you have no solution to keeping our kids safe in MCPS. Why wait till a crime happens when it could possibly be prevented? You want your child raped, beaten, etc. when if a SRO was there to prevent it, it could save them from a lot of pain and trauma. Or, are you one of those people with magical thinking that nothing bad could ever happen to you?

Definitely need to keep out the SROs if you are concerned about kid safety. Just can't help but think about Tyre Nichols.

I think this is what it boils down to. Some of the posters don’t want Police trying to build relationship with the community or the kids because the distrust is so high they only see officers trying to take advantage. Other posters see a benefit to officers that know the kids as people not just perps, and see relationships as a way to funnel information to officers to prevent crime (not just to snitch on other kids to get them into trouble). I think the former group feels like you never go to law enforcement unless you really have no choice because the risks of interacting with law enfocrement put weight the be benefits.
I really would love for McPS to do an anonymous survey, linked to student IDs (which also means it could be sorted by school and demographics like the PArc scores) that asked whether parents support SROs in schools. I really would like to see the results of that. I really don’t know what those results would look like. Then they should do the same with teachers and counselors.

I would like to know how many parents had to hire a lawyer for the 97 % of interaction that never needed a cop.

I’d like to know how often SRO’s provided bad info to investigators based on their bias.

DP.
We are still waiting for a poster above to provide that data for us. I’ve asked twice now.

You think mc police and the state’s attorney office will share that.

But you don’t care because it wasn’t your child.

I’m a teacher. I do care about my “children.” I’ve taught over 2,700. I’d care quite deeply to hear if something like this has happened to one of them. Don’t try that character attack on me.

Well it happens and it’s traumatic. It’s literally trauma. What HS are you in that you don’t know this happens.

I don’t discredit the idea this has happened somewhere to someone, and I would agree would be traumatic. Was this in MCPS? Poor behavior on the part of an SRO would NOT be tolerated. I posted a link above that shows how many people one SRO reports to, what type of training they do so they can be sensitive to teen needs, etc.

As for what school, I’m not putting that online. I will say that I’ve seen so many positive interactions. My students have even asked the SRO to sit in on class briefly, or sit with them for a bit at lunch. What I’ve seen is students form strong relationships, and I’ve seen them value the SRO as a trusted adult in the building. I watched one of my 12th graders actively seek him out to talk after a bad weekend. I watched another get excited to see the SRO at his evening game. I have dozens of stories like these. Dozens.

Genuine question: was there something about this person being an LEO that you think was integral to the students liking him? Would/could the same positive interactions occurred if it was an extra counselor or other admin?

^^^ This.

It’s such a bizarre notion that these students can’t find one person in the whole school to talk to about their bad weekend. What is up with that? That’s a serious problem.

I’m the person who posted about the many, many positive SRO experiences I have witnessed. The question is whether someone else could provide this level of support. Sure. But what’s wrong with it being a LEO? Students have counselors, teachers, admin, and (until recently) SROs. This is a great example of fostering community. Look at the PGCPS data. Over 80% had positive views of the program. Over 90% who actually had interacted with an SRO defined it as a positive experience. It seems that actually interacting with SROs confirms that they can be valuable.

The county Exec decided to yank SROs out of schools against principals’ wishes and without an actual survey. The PGCPS data is what we have to go on regarding community beliefs about this program. Until I see MCPS bother to do a similar survey, I’m going to assume similar results.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Thanks for the taking points posted by a PP—very helpful. Condensing, it sounds like there are three major differences with the old SRO program:
— CEOs have a designated work station at the HS but are not stationed there (unclear what this means in practice but I’d guess it means they need to at least report to shift at police station)
— ceos not allowed to patrol hallways or respond to school incidents (unclear what that means—if a security officer says “there are kids using drugs in the bathroom and they are refusing to disperse” can the CEO assist?)
— unlike SROs, ceos do not have primary response for arson or drug distribution. Unclear to me who does have primary response for that….McPS security? Principals?
Taking the second two things in combination, it appears that MCPD no longer has any role in making sure kids aren’t using or selling drugs in schools. That seems to me not ideal.

#1 SRO’s had no place to sit so they had to wonder the halls or sit in their car to write a report. Now they have an office.

#2 means that if a teacher is dealing with a disciplinary issue a cop can’t get involved. Often SRO’s would escalate a simple disciplinary issue that teachers were able to handle and teachers did not feel like they could tell a cop to butt out. SROs now only respond to crimes.

#3 arsons are investigated by fire Marshall’s not cops. The Bethesda mag article explains the “drug” response.

#4 no it not true that cops are not involved in drug enforcement for distribution and dangerous drugs. Anything that is a non criminal drug charge in Montgomery County (aka possession of a small amount of pot or paraphernalia ) will now be dealt with by MCPS discipline .

#1. Our SROs always were given a place to work. They walked the halls, but they also had a “home” for work.

#2. SROs did not step in when I was dealing with discipline in my classroom. They didn’t do that to my colleagues, either. Why? Because, as you said, that would escalate the issue and the teacher would loose authority. So, clearly, SROs did not do this. Where are you coming up with this? This isn’t how SROs operated at. all.

I’d love to know where you got these beliefs.

#1 not all schools are the same

#2 most complaints came from teachers in ED classrooms. Are you an ED teacher? I’m glad you agree that SRO’s should not get involved with discipline. That change must please you. It’s explained in the Bethesda magazine article.

Yes, I have worked with ED students in all of my classes. Good attempt at twisting my words, but I can handle discipline in my own classroom while simultaneously being supported by the work of an SRO. There are times I am not equipped to handle a situation, like the weapon that was found in my classroom. I should NOT be expected to handle situations like that, and I should absolutely have the support an an SRO in those cases. The current CEO model doesn’t place the officer close to my classroom, nor does that officer know my children. This is a worse situation. You are welcome to spin it any way you like, of course, but it won’t match my reality nor that of many others with actual experience with SROs.

A weapon would be a crime and a CEO would be involved. CEO’s are in the school and if you have not been given instructions on how to ask for a response you need to reach out to your principal.

How did you call for the SRO?

Quietly simply texted the main office and he was at my door in less than 2 minutes. Since a CEO could be anywhere in a cluster, I doubt I’ll get the same response next time. Also, the SRO already had an established relationship with the student, so the student willingly left the classroom and talked to the trusted officer. A CEO won’t have the same type of relationship.

Again: I come from a place of experience and understanding.

The new model will be that you can call the CEO directly but that part has not been implemented yet.

If you can’t text your front office and get the CEO you should report that. Starting Fall 21 CEO’s were back in schools the same way SRO were. Also students can approach CEO’s if they want. CEO’s are just not allowed to create fake relationship with students to purposely narc on them to investigators they have to live by the same privacy rules teachers do unless it’s a criminal investigation.

Again: I have a very novel experience with security in schools as well as cities, events, sports events, and govt buildings.

You say you have experience with “security,” not with SROs. Your language also shows extreme bias (“fake relationships,” “purposefully narc”). The combination of the two demonstrates we have nothing further to discuss.

I’ve worked with too many amazing SROs to entertain this any further.

Please explain to me how the SROs on site at parkland and uvalde helped?

It's well known that SROs do almost nothing for school safety and in many cases have made matters worse.

Again you keep saying this, but post no evidence of how this applies to Montgomery County, or even Maryland. What incidents in Montgomery County can you refer to in which having the SROs have made matters worse?

It was shown that SROs created many false arrests and provided bad information to investigators. They will no longer be used in this capacity.

Source please? The fact is only 3% of incidents that were handled by SROs in MCPS resulted in an arrest.

That doesn’t count the arrests made by investigators with SRO information..

Also why don’t they publicize how many of those arrests were false?

How is that different from arrests made from teacher/staff/administration information?

Its extra staff in the schools that MCPS isn't paying for as it comes out of police funding not MCPS.

What is your solution? You have yet to give us any. Incidents are up.

The solution is that cops are only called when there is a crime.

When there is no crime (which is 97% of the time) it is referred to MCPS disciplinary proceedings.

That should free cops up for law enforcement.

They are not a concierge service.

So, you have no solution to keeping our kids safe in MCPS. Why wait till a crime happens when it could possibly be prevented? You want your child raped, beaten, etc. when if a SRO was there to prevent it, it could save them from a lot of pain and trauma. Or, are you one of those people with magical thinking that nothing bad could ever happen to you?

Definitely need to keep out the SROs if you are concerned about kid safety. Just can't help but think about Tyre Nichols.

I think this is what it boils down to. Some of the posters don’t want Police trying to build relationship with the community or the kids because the distrust is so high they only see officers trying to take advantage. Other posters see a benefit to officers that know the kids as people not just perps, and see relationships as a way to funnel information to officers to prevent crime (not just to snitch on other kids to get them into trouble). I think the former group feels like you never go to law enforcement unless you really have no choice because the risks of interacting with law enfocrement put weight the be benefits.
I really would love for McPS to do an anonymous survey, linked to student IDs (which also means it could be sorted by school and demographics like the PArc scores) that asked whether parents support SROs in schools. I really would like to see the results of that. I really don’t know what those results would look like. Then they should do the same with teachers and counselors.

I would like to know how many parents had to hire a lawyer for the 97 % of interaction that never needed a cop.

I’d like to know how often SRO’s provided bad info to investigators based on their bias.

DP.
We are still waiting for a poster above to provide that data for us. I’ve asked twice now.

You think mc police and the state’s attorney office will share that.

But you don’t care because it wasn’t your child.

I’m a teacher. I do care about my “children.” I’ve taught over 2,700. I’d care quite deeply to hear if something like this has happened to one of them. Don’t try that character attack on me.

Well it happens and it’s traumatic. It’s literally trauma. What HS are you in that you don’t know this happens.

I don’t discredit the idea this has happened somewhere to someone, and I would agree would be traumatic. Was this in MCPS? Poor behavior on the part of an SRO would NOT be tolerated. I posted a link above that shows how many people one SRO reports to, what type of training they do so they can be sensitive to teen needs, etc.

As for what school, I’m not putting that online. I will say that I’ve seen so many positive interactions. My students have even asked the SRO to sit in on class briefly, or sit with them for a bit at lunch. What I’ve seen is students form strong relationships, and I’ve seen them value the SRO as a trusted adult in the building. I watched one of my 12th graders actively seek him out to talk after a bad weekend. I watched another get excited to see the SRO at his evening game. I have dozens of stories like these. Dozens.

Genuine question: was there something about this person being an LEO that you think was integral to the students liking him? Would/could the same positive interactions occurred if it was an extra counselor or other admin?

^^^ This.

It’s such a bizarre notion that these students can’t find one person in the whole school to talk to about their bad weekend. What is up with that? That’s a serious problem.

I’m the person who posted about the many, many positive SRO experiences I have witnessed. The question is whether someone else could provide this level of support. Sure. But what’s wrong with it being a LEO? Students have counselors, teachers, admin, and (until recently) SROs. This is a great example of fostering community. Look at the PGCPS data. Over 80% had positive views of the program. Over 90% who actually had interacted with an SRO defined it as a positive experience. It seems that actually interacting with SROs confirms that they can be valuable.

The county Exec decided to yank SROs out of schools against principals’ wishes and without an actual survey. The PGCPS data is what we have to go on regarding community beliefs about this program. Until I see MCPS bother to do a similar survey, I’m going to assume similar results.

PG remove 2/3 of their security with arrest powers.

SRO’s were taken out of MCPS and put in the parking lot for one year.

They are back with some corrections (the same PG made with regard to false arrests) that both support kids and don’t traumatize others with false arrests/citations.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Thanks for the taking points posted by a PP—very helpful. Condensing, it sounds like there are three major differences with the old SRO program:
— CEOs have a designated work station at the HS but are not stationed there (unclear what this means in practice but I’d guess it means they need to at least report to shift at police station)
— ceos not allowed to patrol hallways or respond to school incidents (unclear what that means—if a security officer says “there are kids using drugs in the bathroom and they are refusing to disperse” can the CEO assist?)
— unlike SROs, ceos do not have primary response for arson or drug distribution. Unclear to me who does have primary response for that….McPS security? Principals?
Taking the second two things in combination, it appears that MCPD no longer has any role in making sure kids aren’t using or selling drugs in schools. That seems to me not ideal.

#1 SRO’s had no place to sit so they had to wonder the halls or sit in their car to write a report. Now they have an office.


#2 means that if a teacher is dealing with a disciplinary issue a cop can’t get involved. Often SRO’s would escalate a simple disciplinary issue that teachers were able to handle and teachers did not feel like they could tell a cop to butt out. SROs now only respond to crimes.

#3 arsons are investigated by fire Marshall’s not cops. The Bethesda mag article explains the “drug” response.

#4 no it not true that cops are not involved in drug enforcement for distribution and dangerous drugs. Anything that is a non criminal drug charge in Montgomery County (aka possession of a small amount of pot or paraphernalia ) will now be dealt with by MCPS discipline .

#1. Our SROs always were given a place to work. They walked the halls, but they also had a “home” for work.

#2. SROs did not step in when I was dealing with discipline in my classroom. They didn’t do that to my colleagues, either. Why? Because, as you said, that would escalate the issue and the teacher would loose authority. So, clearly, SROs did not do this. Where are you coming up with this? This isn’t how SROs operated at. all.

I’d love to know where you got these beliefs.

#1 not all schools are the same

#2 most complaints came from teachers in ED classrooms. Are you an ED teacher? I’m glad you agree that SRO’s should not get involved with discipline. That change must please you. It’s explained in the Bethesda magazine article.

Yes, I have worked with ED students in all of my classes. Good attempt at twisting my words, but I can handle discipline in my own classroom while simultaneously being supported by the work of an SRO. There are times I am not equipped to handle a situation, like the weapon that was found in my classroom. I should NOT be expected to handle situations like that, and I should absolutely have the support an an SRO in those cases. The current CEO model doesn’t place the officer close to my classroom, nor does that officer know my children. This is a worse situation. You are welcome to spin it any way you like, of course, but it won’t match my reality nor that of many others with actual experience with SROs.

A weapon would be a crime and a CEO would be involved. CEO’s are in the school and if you have not been given instructions on how to ask for a response you need to reach out to your principal.

How did you call for the SRO?

Quietly simply texted the main office and he was at my door in less than 2 minutes. Since a CEO could be anywhere in a cluster, I doubt I’ll get the same response next time. Also, the SRO already had an established relationship with the student, so the student willingly left the classroom and talked to the trusted officer. A CEO won’t have the same type of relationship.

Again: I come from a place of experience and understanding.

The new model will be that you can call the CEO directly but that part has not been implemented yet.

If you can’t text your front office and get the CEO you should report that. Starting Fall 21 CEO’s were back in schools the same way SRO were. Also students can approach CEO’s if they want. CEO’s are just not allowed to create fake relationship with students to purposely narc on them to investigators they have to live by the same privacy rules teachers do unless it’s a criminal investigation.

Again: I have a very novel experience with security in schools as well as cities, events, sports events, and govt buildings.

You say you have experience with “security,” not with SROs. Your language also shows extreme bias (“fake relationships,” “purposefully narc”). The combination of the two demonstrates we have nothing further to discuss.

I’ve worked with too many amazing SROs to entertain this any further.

Please explain to me how the SROs on site at parkland and uvalde helped?

It's well known that SROs do almost nothing for school safety and in many cases have made matters worse.

Again you keep saying this, but post no evidence of how this applies to Montgomery County, or even Maryland. What incidents in Montgomery County can you refer to in which having the SROs have made matters worse?

It was shown that SROs created many false arrests and provided bad information to investigators. They will no longer be used in this capacity.

Source please? The fact is only 3% of incidents that were handled by SROs in MCPS resulted in an arrest.

So 97% of the time SROs got invoked they were not needed because no crime was committed.

That’s not remotely how the data works:
https://www.montgomerycountymd.gov/pol/Resources/Files/SRO/MCPD-SRO-FAQ.pdf

Take a look at pages 8-10. SROs do more than issue arrests. I posted this above on this thread: they are part of a community and serve a valuable role. Teachers can’t do what they do, nor can administrators.

You want cops delivering food? Really? Ffs!

Actually, yes, I do want them to deliver food. Not everyone had transportation or the ability to get to the school during the workday and it was a good way to have eyes on kids that might be at risk at home. Think about it logically. It wasn't just about the food. It was about student safety at home as well. Having kids have access to food at home is pretty important. Not everyone has your privilege.

It’s also a good way for an SRO type cast a poor kid as trouble when they previously thought they were quiet good students.

I’m sure the PTA has enough hands to get food to children, or have a church earn their tax free status.

I’m still waiting for one of the anti-SRO posters to provide data that backs up this absurd argument about typecasting kids and intentionally getting them in trouble. Would somebody please point to MCPS data that shows SROs behaving this way?

I have worked with great SROs who helped bridge gaps between police and the community. They proved themselves to be great resources for the students, and many students actively sought them out. Show me MCPS or MoCo data that demonstrates these bonds were somehow insincere,

I've been waiting for the pro SRO protestors to also provide any data. I heard there were SROs at Parkland and Uvalde and that didn't do any good. It's clear they aren't that helpful if you are concerned about safety so not sure what the point is exactly.

Omg lady, do you just open up a bottle of wine each night and with each glass you post the same post over and over and over again. At least get creative so it isn't so obvious it's the same f'ing person.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Thanks for the taking points posted by a PP—very helpful. Condensing, it sounds like there are three major differences with the old SRO program:
— CEOs have a designated work station at the HS but are not stationed there (unclear what this means in practice but I’d guess it means they need to at least report to shift at police station)
— ceos not allowed to patrol hallways or respond to school incidents (unclear what that means—if a security officer says “there are kids using drugs in the bathroom and they are refusing to disperse” can the CEO assist?)
— unlike SROs, ceos do not have primary response for arson or drug distribution. Unclear to me who does have primary response for that….McPS security? Principals?
Taking the second two things in combination, it appears that MCPD no longer has any role in making sure kids aren’t using or selling drugs in schools. That seems to me not ideal.

#1 SRO’s had no place to sit so they had to wonder the halls or sit in their car to write a report. Now they have an office.

#2 means that if a teacher is dealing with a disciplinary issue a cop can’t get involved. Often SRO’s would escalate a simple disciplinary issue that teachers were able to handle and teachers did not feel like they could tell a cop to butt out. SROs now only respond to crimes.

#3 arsons are investigated by fire Marshall’s not cops. The Bethesda mag article explains the “drug” response.

#4 no it not true that cops are not involved in drug enforcement for distribution and dangerous drugs. Anything that is a non criminal drug charge in Montgomery County (aka possession of a small amount of pot or paraphernalia ) will now be dealt with by MCPS discipline .

#1. Our SROs always were given a place to work. They walked the halls, but they also had a “home” for work.

#2. SROs did not step in when I was dealing with discipline in my classroom. They didn’t do that to my colleagues, either. Why? Because, as you said, that would escalate the issue and the teacher would loose authority. So, clearly, SROs did not do this. Where are you coming up with this? This isn’t how SROs operated at. all.

I’d love to know where you got these beliefs.

#1 not all schools are the same

#2 most complaints came from teachers in ED classrooms. Are you an ED teacher? I’m glad you agree that SRO’s should not get involved with discipline. That change must please you. It’s explained in the Bethesda magazine article.

Yes, I have worked with ED students in all of my classes. Good attempt at twisting my words, but I can handle discipline in my own classroom while simultaneously being supported by the work of an SRO. There are times I am not equipped to handle a situation, like the weapon that was found in my classroom. I should NOT be expected to handle situations like that, and I should absolutely have the support an an SRO in those cases. The current CEO model doesn’t place the officer close to my classroom, nor does that officer know my children. This is a worse situation. You are welcome to spin it any way you like, of course, but it won’t match my reality nor that of many others with actual experience with SROs.

A weapon would be a crime and a CEO would be involved. CEO’s are in the school and if you have not been given instructions on how to ask for a response you need to reach out to your principal.

How did you call for the SRO?

Quietly simply texted the main office and he was at my door in less than 2 minutes. Since a CEO could be anywhere in a cluster, I doubt I’ll get the same response next time. Also, the SRO already had an established relationship with the student, so the student willingly left the classroom and talked to the trusted officer. A CEO won’t have the same type of relationship.

Again: I come from a place of experience and understanding.

The new model will be that you can call the CEO directly but that part has not been implemented yet.

If you can’t text your front office and get the CEO you should report that. Starting Fall 21 CEO’s were back in schools the same way SRO were. Also students can approach CEO’s if they want. CEO’s are just not allowed to create fake relationship with students to purposely narc on them to investigators they have to live by the same privacy rules teachers do unless it’s a criminal investigation.

Again: I have a very novel experience with security in schools as well as cities, events, sports events, and govt buildings.

You say you have experience with “security,” not with SROs. Your language also shows extreme bias (“fake relationships,” “purposefully narc”). The combination of the two demonstrates we have nothing further to discuss.

I’ve worked with too many amazing SROs to entertain this any further.

Please explain to me how the SROs on site at parkland and uvalde helped?

It's well known that SROs do almost nothing for school safety and in many cases have made matters worse.

Again you keep saying this, but post no evidence of how this applies to Montgomery County, or even Maryland. What incidents in Montgomery County can you refer to in which having the SROs have made matters worse?

It was shown that SROs created many false arrests and provided bad information to investigators. They will no longer be used in this capacity.

Source please? The fact is only 3% of incidents that were handled by SROs in MCPS resulted in an arrest.

That doesn’t count the arrests made by investigators with SRO information..

Also why don’t they publicize how many of those arrests were false?

How is that different from arrests made from teacher/staff/administration information?

Its extra staff in the schools that MCPS isn't paying for as it comes out of police funding not MCPS.

What is your solution? You have yet to give us any. Incidents are up.

The solution is that cops are only called when there is a crime.

When there is no crime (which is 97% of the time) it is referred to MCPS disciplinary proceedings.

That should free cops up for law enforcement.

They are not a concierge service.

So, you have no solution to keeping our kids safe in MCPS. Why wait till a crime happens when it could possibly be prevented? You want your child raped, beaten, etc. when if a SRO was there to prevent it, it could save them from a lot of pain and trauma. Or, are you one of those people with magical thinking that nothing bad could ever happen to you?

Definitely need to keep out the SROs if you are concerned about kid safety. Just can't help but think about Tyre Nichols.

I think this is what it boils down to. Some of the posters don’t want Police trying to build relationship with the community or the kids because the distrust is so high they only see officers trying to take advantage. Other posters see a benefit to officers that know the kids as people not just perps, and see relationships as a way to funnel information to officers to prevent crime (not just to snitch on other kids to get them into trouble). I think the former group feels like you never go to law enforcement unless you really have no choice because the risks of interacting with law enfocrement put weight the be benefits.
I really would love for McPS to do an anonymous survey, linked to student IDs (which also means it could be sorted by school and demographics like the PArc scores) that asked whether parents support SROs in schools. I really would like to see the results of that. I really don’t know what those results would look like. Then they should do the same with teachers and counselors.

I would like to know how many parents had to hire a lawyer for the 97 % of interaction that never needed a cop.

I’d like to know how often SRO’s provided bad info to investigators based on their bias.

DP.
We are still waiting for a poster above to provide that data for us. I’ve asked twice now.

You think mc police and the state’s attorney office will share that.

But you don’t care because it wasn’t your child.

I’m a teacher. I do care about my “children.” I’ve taught over 2,700. I’d care quite deeply to hear if something like this has happened to one of them. Don’t try that character attack on me.

Well it happens and it’s traumatic. It’s literally trauma. What HS are you in that you don’t know this happens.

I don’t discredit the idea this has happened somewhere to someone, and I would agree would be traumatic. Was this in MCPS? Poor behavior on the part of an SRO would NOT be tolerated. I posted a link above that shows how many people one SRO reports to, what type of training they do so they can be sensitive to teen needs, etc.

As for what school, I’m not putting that online. I will say that I’ve seen so many positive interactions. My students have even asked the SRO to sit in on class briefly, or sit with them for a bit at lunch. What I’ve seen is students form strong relationships, and I’ve seen them value the SRO as a trusted adult in the building. I watched one of my 12th graders actively seek him out to talk after a bad weekend. I watched another get excited to see the SRO at his evening game. I have dozens of stories like these. Dozens.

Genuine question: was there something about this person being an LEO that you think was integral to the students liking him? Would/could the same positive interactions occurred if it was an extra counselor or other admin?

^^^ This.

It’s such a bizarre notion that these students can’t find one person in the whole school to talk to about their bad weekend. What is up with that? That’s a serious problem.

I’m the person who posted about the many, many positive SRO experiences I have witnessed. The question is whether someone else could provide this level of support. Sure. But what’s wrong with it being a LEO? Students have counselors, teachers, admin, and (until recently) SROs. This is a great example of fostering community. Look at the PGCPS data. Over 80% had positive views of the program. Over 90% who actually had interacted with an SRO defined it as a positive experience. It seems that actually interacting with SROs confirms that they can be valuable.

The county Exec decided to yank SROs out of schools against principals’ wishes and without an actual survey. The PGCPS data is what we have to go on regarding community beliefs about this program. Until I see MCPS bother to do a similar survey, I’m going to assume similar results.

PG remove 2/3 of their security with arrest powers.

SRO’s were taken out of MCPS and put in the parking lot for one year.

They are back with some corrections (the same PG made with regard to false arrests) that both support kids and don’t traumatize others with false arrests/citations.

That's not how I see the role of the CEO, nor do your accusations of false arrests fit with my 17 years of experience or the published data. We'll simply have to disagree.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Thanks for the taking points posted by a PP—very helpful. Condensing, it sounds like there are three major differences with the old SRO program:
— CEOs have a designated work station at the HS but are not stationed there (unclear what this means in practice but I’d guess it means they need to at least report to shift at police station)
— ceos not allowed to patrol hallways or respond to school incidents (unclear what that means—if a security officer says “there are kids using drugs in the bathroom and they are refusing to disperse” can the CEO assist?)
— unlike SROs, ceos do not have primary response for arson or drug distribution. Unclear to me who does have primary response for that….McPS security? Principals?
Taking the second two things in combination, it appears that MCPD no longer has any role in making sure kids aren’t using or selling drugs in schools. That seems to me not ideal.

#1 SRO’s had no place to sit so they had to wonder the halls or sit in their car to write a report. Now they have an office.


#2 means that if a teacher is dealing with a disciplinary issue a cop can’t get involved. Often SRO’s would escalate a simple disciplinary issue that teachers were able to handle and teachers did not feel like they could tell a cop to butt out. SROs now only respond to crimes.

#3 arsons are investigated by fire Marshall’s not cops. The Bethesda mag article explains the “drug” response.

#4 no it not true that cops are not involved in drug enforcement for distribution and dangerous drugs. Anything that is a non criminal drug charge in Montgomery County (aka possession of a small amount of pot or paraphernalia ) will now be dealt with by MCPS discipline .

#1. Our SROs always were given a place to work. They walked the halls, but they also had a “home” for work.

#2. SROs did not step in when I was dealing with discipline in my classroom. They didn’t do that to my colleagues, either. Why? Because, as you said, that would escalate the issue and the teacher would loose authority. So, clearly, SROs did not do this. Where are you coming up with this? This isn’t how SROs operated at. all.

I’d love to know where you got these beliefs.

#1 not all schools are the same

#2 most complaints came from teachers in ED classrooms. Are you an ED teacher? I’m glad you agree that SRO’s should not get involved with discipline. That change must please you. It’s explained in the Bethesda magazine article.

Yes, I have worked with ED students in all of my classes. Good attempt at twisting my words, but I can handle discipline in my own classroom while simultaneously being supported by the work of an SRO. There are times I am not equipped to handle a situation, like the weapon that was found in my classroom. I should NOT be expected to handle situations like that, and I should absolutely have the support an an SRO in those cases. The current CEO model doesn’t place the officer close to my classroom, nor does that officer know my children. This is a worse situation. You are welcome to spin it any way you like, of course, but it won’t match my reality nor that of many others with actual experience with SROs.

A weapon would be a crime and a CEO would be involved. CEO’s are in the school and if you have not been given instructions on how to ask for a response you need to reach out to your principal.

How did you call for the SRO?

Quietly simply texted the main office and he was at my door in less than 2 minutes. Since a CEO could be anywhere in a cluster, I doubt I’ll get the same response next time. Also, the SRO already had an established relationship with the student, so the student willingly left the classroom and talked to the trusted officer. A CEO won’t have the same type of relationship.

Again: I come from a place of experience and understanding.

The new model will be that you can call the CEO directly but that part has not been implemented yet.

If you can’t text your front office and get the CEO you should report that. Starting Fall 21 CEO’s were back in schools the same way SRO were. Also students can approach CEO’s if they want. CEO’s are just not allowed to create fake relationship with students to purposely narc on them to investigators they have to live by the same privacy rules teachers do unless it’s a criminal investigation.

Again: I have a very novel experience with security in schools as well as cities, events, sports events, and govt buildings.

You say you have experience with “security,” not with SROs. Your language also shows extreme bias (“fake relationships,” “purposefully narc”). The combination of the two demonstrates we have nothing further to discuss.

I’ve worked with too many amazing SROs to entertain this any further.

Please explain to me how the SROs on site at parkland and uvalde helped?

It's well known that SROs do almost nothing for school safety and in many cases have made matters worse.

Again you keep saying this, but post no evidence of how this applies to Montgomery County, or even Maryland. What incidents in Montgomery County can you refer to in which having the SROs have made matters worse?

It was shown that SROs created many false arrests and provided bad information to investigators. They will no longer be used in this capacity.

Source please? The fact is only 3% of incidents that were handled by SROs in MCPS resulted in an arrest.

So 97% of the time SROs got invoked they were not needed because no crime was committed.

That’s not remotely how the data works:
https://www.montgomerycountymd.gov/pol/Resources/Files/SRO/MCPD-SRO-FAQ.pdf

Take a look at pages 8-10. SROs do more than issue arrests. I posted this above on this thread: they are part of a community and serve a valuable role. Teachers can’t do what they do, nor can administrators.

You want cops delivering food? Really? Ffs!

Actually, yes, I do want them to deliver food. Not everyone had transportation or the ability to get to the school during the workday and it was a good way to have eyes on kids that might be at risk at home. Think about it logically. It wasn't just about the food. It was about student safety at home as well. Having kids have access to food at home is pretty important. Not everyone has your privilege.

It’s also a good way for an SRO type cast a poor kid as trouble when they previously thought they were quiet good students.

I’m sure the PTA has enough hands to get food to children, or have a church earn their tax free status.

I’m still waiting for one of the anti-SRO posters to provide data that backs up this absurd argument about typecasting kids and intentionally getting them in trouble. Would somebody please point to MCPS data that shows SROs behaving this way?

I have worked with great SROs who helped bridge gaps between police and the community. They proved themselves to be great resources for the students, and many students actively sought them out. Show me MCPS or MoCo data that demonstrates these bonds were somehow insincere,

I've been waiting for the pro SRO protestors to also provide any data. I heard there were SROs at Parkland and Uvalde and that didn't do any good. It's clear they aren't that helpful if you are concerned about safety so not sure what the point is exactly.

Omg lady, do you just open up a bottle of wine each night and with each glass you post the same post over and over and over again. At least get creative so it isn't so obvious it's the same f'ing person.

She has single handily kept this thread at the top for well over a week!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Thanks for the taking points posted by a PP—very helpful. Condensing, it sounds like there are three major differences with the old SRO program:
— CEOs have a designated work station at the HS but are not stationed there (unclear what this means in practice but I’d guess it means they need to at least report to shift at police station)
— ceos not allowed to patrol hallways or respond to school incidents (unclear what that means—if a security officer says “there are kids using drugs in the bathroom and they are refusing to disperse” can the CEO assist?)
— unlike SROs, ceos do not have primary response for arson or drug distribution. Unclear to me who does have primary response for that….McPS security? Principals?
Taking the second two things in combination, it appears that MCPD no longer has any role in making sure kids aren’t using or selling drugs in schools. That seems to me not ideal.

#1 SRO’s had no place to sit so they had to wonder the halls or sit in their car to write a report. Now they have an office.

#2 means that if a teacher is dealing with a disciplinary issue a cop can’t get involved. Often SRO’s would escalate a simple disciplinary issue that teachers were able to handle and teachers did not feel like they could tell a cop to butt out. SROs now only respond to crimes.

#3 arsons are investigated by fire Marshall’s not cops. The Bethesda mag article explains the “drug” response.

#4 no it not true that cops are not involved in drug enforcement for distribution and dangerous drugs. Anything that is a non criminal drug charge in Montgomery County (aka possession of a small amount of pot or paraphernalia ) will now be dealt with by MCPS discipline .

#1. Our SROs always were given a place to work. They walked the halls, but they also had a “home” for work.

#2. SROs did not step in when I was dealing with discipline in my classroom. They didn’t do that to my colleagues, either. Why? Because, as you said, that would escalate the issue and the teacher would loose authority. So, clearly, SROs did not do this. Where are you coming up with this? This isn’t how SROs operated at. all.

I’d love to know where you got these beliefs.

#1 not all schools are the same

#2 most complaints came from teachers in ED classrooms. Are you an ED teacher? I’m glad you agree that SRO’s should not get involved with discipline. That change must please you. It’s explained in the Bethesda magazine article.

Yes, I have worked with ED students in all of my classes. Good attempt at twisting my words, but I can handle discipline in my own classroom while simultaneously being supported by the work of an SRO. There are times I am not equipped to handle a situation, like the weapon that was found in my classroom. I should NOT be expected to handle situations like that, and I should absolutely have the support an an SRO in those cases. The current CEO model doesn’t place the officer close to my classroom, nor does that officer know my children. This is a worse situation. You are welcome to spin it any way you like, of course, but it won’t match my reality nor that of many others with actual experience with SROs.

A weapon would be a crime and a CEO would be involved. CEO’s are in the school and if you have not been given instructions on how to ask for a response you need to reach out to your principal.

How did you call for the SRO?

Quietly simply texted the main office and he was at my door in less than 2 minutes. Since a CEO could be anywhere in a cluster, I doubt I’ll get the same response next time. Also, the SRO already had an established relationship with the student, so the student willingly left the classroom and talked to the trusted officer. A CEO won’t have the same type of relationship.

Again: I come from a place of experience and understanding.

The new model will be that you can call the CEO directly but that part has not been implemented yet.

If you can’t text your front office and get the CEO you should report that. Starting Fall 21 CEO’s were back in schools the same way SRO were. Also students can approach CEO’s if they want. CEO’s are just not allowed to create fake relationship with students to purposely narc on them to investigators they have to live by the same privacy rules teachers do unless it’s a criminal investigation.

Again: I have a very novel experience with security in schools as well as cities, events, sports events, and govt buildings.

You say you have experience with “security,” not with SROs. Your language also shows extreme bias (“fake relationships,” “purposefully narc”). The combination of the two demonstrates we have nothing further to discuss.

I’ve worked with too many amazing SROs to entertain this any further.

Please explain to me how the SROs on site at parkland and uvalde helped?

It's well known that SROs do almost nothing for school safety and in many cases have made matters worse.

Again you keep saying this, but post no evidence of how this applies to Montgomery County, or even Maryland. What incidents in Montgomery County can you refer to in which having the SROs have made matters worse?

It was shown that SROs created many false arrests and provided bad information to investigators. They will no longer be used in this capacity.

Source please? The fact is only 3% of incidents that were handled by SROs in MCPS resulted in an arrest.

That doesn’t count the arrests made by investigators with SRO information..

Also why don’t they publicize how many of those arrests were false?

How is that different from arrests made from teacher/staff/administration information?

Its extra staff in the schools that MCPS isn't paying for as it comes out of police funding not MCPS.

What is your solution? You have yet to give us any. Incidents are up.

The solution is that cops are only called when there is a crime.

When there is no crime (which is 97% of the time) it is referred to MCPS disciplinary proceedings.

That should free cops up for law enforcement.

They are not a concierge service.

So, you have no solution to keeping our kids safe in MCPS. Why wait till a crime happens when it could possibly be prevented? You want your child raped, beaten, etc. when if a SRO was there to prevent it, it could save them from a lot of pain and trauma. Or, are you one of those people with magical thinking that nothing bad could ever happen to you?

Definitely need to keep out the SROs if you are concerned about kid safety. Just can't help but think about Tyre Nichols.

I think this is what it boils down to. Some of the posters don’t want Police trying to build relationship with the community or the kids because the distrust is so high they only see officers trying to take advantage. Other posters see a benefit to officers that know the kids as people not just perps, and see relationships as a way to funnel information to officers to prevent crime (not just to snitch on other kids to get them into trouble). I think the former group feels like you never go to law enforcement unless you really have no choice because the risks of interacting with law enfocrement put weight the be benefits.
I really would love for McPS to do an anonymous survey, linked to student IDs (which also means it could be sorted by school and demographics like the PArc scores) that asked whether parents support SROs in schools. I really would like to see the results of that. I really don’t know what those results would look like. Then they should do the same with teachers and counselors.

I would like to know how many parents had to hire a lawyer for the 97 % of interaction that never needed a cop.

I’d like to know how often SRO’s provided bad info to investigators based on their bias.

DP.
We are still waiting for a poster above to provide that data for us. I’ve asked twice now.

You think mc police and the state’s attorney office will share that.

But you don’t care because it wasn’t your child.

I’m a teacher. I do care about my “children.” I’ve taught over 2,700. I’d care quite deeply to hear if something like this has happened to one of them. Don’t try that character attack on me.

Well it happens and it’s traumatic. It’s literally trauma. What HS are you in that you don’t know this happens.

I don’t discredit the idea this has happened somewhere to someone, and I would agree would be traumatic. Was this in MCPS? Poor behavior on the part of an SRO would NOT be tolerated. I posted a link above that shows how many people one SRO reports to, what type of training they do so they can be sensitive to teen needs, etc.

As for what school, I’m not putting that online. I will say that I’ve seen so many positive interactions. My students have even asked the SRO to sit in on class briefly, or sit with them for a bit at lunch. What I’ve seen is students form strong relationships, and I’ve seen them value the SRO as a trusted adult in the building. I watched one of my 12th graders actively seek him out to talk after a bad weekend. I watched another get excited to see the SRO at his evening game. I have dozens of stories like these. Dozens.

There is no way you can be a teacher at a MS or HS and be this clueless or maybe that is why so many bad things are happening? Kids have been assaulted in MCPS schools. Kids are overdosing. Kids are being bullied. Kids are being raped. Kids are being shamed on social media. And, much more.

So, what are you doing about it as a teacher? Maybe if your students want the SRO in YOUR classroom, it is because they don't feel you are meeting their needs as a teacher or staff member who is supposed to be providing this needs. Why is it a student prefers an SRO over you?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Thanks for the taking points posted by a PP—very helpful. Condensing, it sounds like there are three major differences with the old SRO program:
— CEOs have a designated work station at the HS but are not stationed there (unclear what this means in practice but I’d guess it means they need to at least report to shift at police station)
— ceos not allowed to patrol hallways or respond to school incidents (unclear what that means—if a security officer says “there are kids using drugs in the bathroom and they are refusing to disperse” can the CEO assist?)
— unlike SROs, ceos do not have primary response for arson or drug distribution. Unclear to me who does have primary response for that….McPS security? Principals?
Taking the second two things in combination, it appears that MCPD no longer has any role in making sure kids aren’t using or selling drugs in schools. That seems to me not ideal.

#1 SRO’s had no place to sit so they had to wonder the halls or sit in their car to write a report. Now they have an office.

#2 means that if a teacher is dealing with a disciplinary issue a cop can’t get involved. Often SRO’s would escalate a simple disciplinary issue that teachers were able to handle and teachers did not feel like they could tell a cop to butt out. SROs now only respond to crimes.

#3 arsons are investigated by fire Marshall’s not cops. The Bethesda mag article explains the “drug” response.

#4 no it not true that cops are not involved in drug enforcement for distribution and dangerous drugs. Anything that is a non criminal drug charge in Montgomery County (aka possession of a small amount of pot or paraphernalia ) will now be dealt with by MCPS discipline .

#1. Our SROs always were given a place to work. They walked the halls, but they also had a “home” for work.

#2. SROs did not step in when I was dealing with discipline in my classroom. They didn’t do that to my colleagues, either. Why? Because, as you said, that would escalate the issue and the teacher would loose authority. So, clearly, SROs did not do this. Where are you coming up with this? This isn’t how SROs operated at. all.

I’d love to know where you got these beliefs.

#1 not all schools are the same

#2 most complaints came from teachers in ED classrooms. Are you an ED teacher? I’m glad you agree that SRO’s should not get involved with discipline. That change must please you. It’s explained in the Bethesda magazine article.

Yes, I have worked with ED students in all of my classes. Good attempt at twisting my words, but I can handle discipline in my own classroom while simultaneously being supported by the work of an SRO. There are times I am not equipped to handle a situation, like the weapon that was found in my classroom. I should NOT be expected to handle situations like that, and I should absolutely have the support an an SRO in those cases. The current CEO model doesn’t place the officer close to my classroom, nor does that officer know my children. This is a worse situation. You are welcome to spin it any way you like, of course, but it won’t match my reality nor that of many others with actual experience with SROs.

A weapon would be a crime and a CEO would be involved. CEO’s are in the school and if you have not been given instructions on how to ask for a response you need to reach out to your principal.

How did you call for the SRO?

Quietly simply texted the main office and he was at my door in less than 2 minutes. Since a CEO could be anywhere in a cluster, I doubt I’ll get the same response next time. Also, the SRO already had an established relationship with the student, so the student willingly left the classroom and talked to the trusted officer. A CEO won’t have the same type of relationship.

Again: I come from a place of experience and understanding.

The new model will be that you can call the CEO directly but that part has not been implemented yet.

If you can’t text your front office and get the CEO you should report that. Starting Fall 21 CEO’s were back in schools the same way SRO were. Also students can approach CEO’s if they want. CEO’s are just not allowed to create fake relationship with students to purposely narc on them to investigators they have to live by the same privacy rules teachers do unless it’s a criminal investigation.

Again: I have a very novel experience with security in schools as well as cities, events, sports events, and govt buildings.

You say you have experience with “security,” not with SROs. Your language also shows extreme bias (“fake relationships,” “purposefully narc”). The combination of the two demonstrates we have nothing further to discuss.

I’ve worked with too many amazing SROs to entertain this any further.

Please explain to me how the SROs on site at parkland and uvalde helped?

It's well known that SROs do almost nothing for school safety and in many cases have made matters worse.

Again you keep saying this, but post no evidence of how this applies to Montgomery County, or even Maryland. What incidents in Montgomery County can you refer to in which having the SROs have made matters worse?

It was shown that SROs created many false arrests and provided bad information to investigators. They will no longer be used in this capacity.

Source please? The fact is only 3% of incidents that were handled by SROs in MCPS resulted in an arrest.

That doesn’t count the arrests made by investigators with SRO information..

Also why don’t they publicize how many of those arrests were false?

How is that different from arrests made from teacher/staff/administration information?

Its extra staff in the schools that MCPS isn't paying for as it comes out of police funding not MCPS.

What is your solution? You have yet to give us any. Incidents are up.

The solution is that cops are only called when there is a crime.

When there is no crime (which is 97% of the time) it is referred to MCPS disciplinary proceedings.

That should free cops up for law enforcement.

They are not a concierge service.

So, you have no solution to keeping our kids safe in MCPS. Why wait till a crime happens when it could possibly be prevented? You want your child raped, beaten, etc. when if a SRO was there to prevent it, it could save them from a lot of pain and trauma. Or, are you one of those people with magical thinking that nothing bad could ever happen to you?

Definitely need to keep out the SROs if you are concerned about kid safety. Just can't help but think about Tyre Nichols.

I think this is what it boils down to. Some of the posters don’t want Police trying to build relationship with the community or the kids because the distrust is so high they only see officers trying to take advantage. Other posters see a benefit to officers that know the kids as people not just perps, and see relationships as a way to funnel information to officers to prevent crime (not just to snitch on other kids to get them into trouble). I think the former group feels like you never go to law enforcement unless you really have no choice because the risks of interacting with law enfocrement put weight the be benefits.
I really would love for McPS to do an anonymous survey, linked to student IDs (which also means it could be sorted by school and demographics like the PArc scores) that asked whether parents support SROs in schools. I really would like to see the results of that. I really don’t know what those results would look like. Then they should do the same with teachers and counselors.

I would like to know how many parents had to hire a lawyer for the 97 % of interaction that never needed a cop.

I’d like to know how often SRO’s provided bad info to investigators based on their bias.

DP.
We are still waiting for a poster above to provide that data for us. I’ve asked twice now.

You think mc police and the state’s attorney office will share that.

But you don’t care because it wasn’t your child.

I’m a teacher. I do care about my “children.” I’ve taught over 2,700. I’d care quite deeply to hear if something like this has happened to one of them. Don’t try that character attack on me.

Well it happens and it’s traumatic. It’s literally trauma. What HS are you in that you don’t know this happens.

I don’t discredit the idea this has happened somewhere to someone, and I would agree would be traumatic. Was this in MCPS? Poor behavior on the part of an SRO would NOT be tolerated. I posted a link above that shows how many people one SRO reports to, what type of training they do so they can be sensitive to teen needs, etc.

As for what school, I’m not putting that online. I will say that I’ve seen so many positive interactions. My students have even asked the SRO to sit in on class briefly, or sit with them for a bit at lunch. What I’ve seen is students form strong relationships, and I’ve seen them value the SRO as a trusted adult in the building. I watched one of my 12th graders actively seek him out to talk after a bad weekend. I watched another get excited to see the SRO at his evening game. I have dozens of stories like these. Dozens.

Genuine question: was there something about this person being an LEO that you think was integral to the students liking him? Would/could the same positive interactions occurred if it was an extra counselor or other admin?

^^^ This.

It’s such a bizarre notion that these students can’t find one person in the whole school to talk to about their bad weekend. What is up with that? That’s a serious problem.

I’m the person who posted about the many, many positive SRO experiences I have witnessed. The question is whether someone else could provide this level of support. Sure. But what’s wrong with it being a LEO? Students have counselors, teachers, admin, and (until recently) SROs. This is a great example of fostering community. Look at the PGCPS data. Over 80% had positive views of the program. Over 90% who actually had interacted with an SRO defined it as a positive experience. It seems that actually interacting with SROs confirms that they can be valuable.

The county Exec decided to yank SROs out of schools against principals’ wishes and without an actual survey. The PGCPS data is what we have to go on regarding community beliefs about this program. Until I see MCPS bother to do a similar survey, I’m going to assume similar results.

PG remove 2/3 of their security with arrest powers.

SRO’s were taken out of MCPS and put in the parking lot for one year.

They are back with some corrections (the same PG made with regard to false arrests) that both support kids and don’t traumatize others with false arrests/citations.

That's not how I see the role of the CEO, nor do your accusations of false arrests fit with my 17 years of experience or the published data. We'll simply have to disagree.

Doesn’t matter how you “see” it. The exact same SRO’s are back with a new name and they are not harassing kids over disciplinary issues.

PG county got rid of 2/3 of security with arrest powers. Facts.

Your agenda some how “sees” it differently but those are the facts. Jack.

[Anonymous]

Need petition to bring back -

SROs
Final Exams and mid terms
Driver's Ed
Textbooks
Tracking
Magnet programs based on academic merit
Suspensions
Discipline in the class rooms
Leaving kids who fail behind


We need to get rid of -
Restorative Justice
Fake equity for magnet programs


We need to offer -
Hybrid on-demand
Intensive tutoring for kids who are falling behind
Better special ed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Need petition to bring back -

SROs
Final Exams and mid terms
Driver's Ed
Textbooks
Tracking
Magnet programs based on academic merit
Suspensions
Discipline in the class rooms
Leaving kids who fail behind


We need to get rid of -
Restorative Justice
Fake equity for magnet programs


We need to offer -
Hybrid on-demand
Intensive tutoring for kids who are falling behind
Better special ed.

- We need to have seperate school for "teenagers" who cannot speak English and are illegal immigrants to this county. They should get intensive tutoring in English and literacy to assimilate in society.

- We need metal detectors in each school.

- We need CCTV in the bathrooms and in each school

- All parents must get NARCAN training.
- We need

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Thanks for the taking points posted by a PP—very helpful. Condensing, it sounds like there are three major differences with the old SRO program:
— CEOs have a designated work station at the HS but are not stationed there (unclear what this means in practice but I’d guess it means they need to at least report to shift at police station)
— ceos not allowed to patrol hallways or respond to school incidents (unclear what that means—if a security officer says “there are kids using drugs in the bathroom and they are refusing to disperse” can the CEO assist?)
— unlike SROs, ceos do not have primary response for arson or drug distribution. Unclear to me who does have primary response for that….McPS security? Principals?
Taking the second two things in combination, it appears that MCPD no longer has any role in making sure kids aren’t using or selling drugs in schools. That seems to me not ideal.

#1 SRO’s had no place to sit so they had to wonder the halls or sit in their car to write a report. Now they have an office.

#2 means that if a teacher is dealing with a disciplinary issue a cop can’t get involved. Often SRO’s would escalate a simple disciplinary issue that teachers were able to handle and teachers did not feel like they could tell a cop to butt out. SROs now only respond to crimes.

#3 arsons are investigated by fire Marshall’s not cops. The Bethesda mag article explains the “drug” response.

#4 no it not true that cops are not involved in drug enforcement for distribution and dangerous drugs. Anything that is a non criminal drug charge in Montgomery County (aka possession of a small amount of pot or paraphernalia ) will now be dealt with by MCPS discipline .

#1. Our SROs always were given a place to work. They walked the halls, but they also had a “home” for work.

#2. SROs did not step in when I was dealing with discipline in my classroom. They didn’t do that to my colleagues, either. Why? Because, as you said, that would escalate the issue and the teacher would loose authority. So, clearly, SROs did not do this. Where are you coming up with this? This isn’t how SROs operated at. all.

I’d love to know where you got these beliefs.

#1 not all schools are the same

#2 most complaints came from teachers in ED classrooms. Are you an ED teacher? I’m glad you agree that SRO’s should not get involved with discipline. That change must please you. It’s explained in the Bethesda magazine article.

Yes, I have worked with ED students in all of my classes. Good attempt at twisting my words, but I can handle discipline in my own classroom while simultaneously being supported by the work of an SRO. There are times I am not equipped to handle a situation, like the weapon that was found in my classroom. I should NOT be expected to handle situations like that, and I should absolutely have the support an an SRO in those cases. The current CEO model doesn’t place the officer close to my classroom, nor does that officer know my children. This is a worse situation. You are welcome to spin it any way you like, of course, but it won’t match my reality nor that of many others with actual experience with SROs.

A weapon would be a crime and a CEO would be involved. CEO’s are in the school and if you have not been given instructions on how to ask for a response you need to reach out to your principal.

How did you call for the SRO?

Quietly simply texted the main office and he was at my door in less than 2 minutes. Since a CEO could be anywhere in a cluster, I doubt I’ll get the same response next time. Also, the SRO already had an established relationship with the student, so the student willingly left the classroom and talked to the trusted officer. A CEO won’t have the same type of relationship.

Again: I come from a place of experience and understanding.

The new model will be that you can call the CEO directly but that part has not been implemented yet.

If you can’t text your front office and get the CEO you should report that. Starting Fall 21 CEO’s were back in schools the same way SRO were. Also students can approach CEO’s if they want. CEO’s are just not allowed to create fake relationship with students to purposely narc on them to investigators they have to live by the same privacy rules teachers do unless it’s a criminal investigation.

Again: I have a very novel experience with security in schools as well as cities, events, sports events, and govt buildings.

You say you have experience with “security,” not with SROs. Your language also shows extreme bias (“fake relationships,” “purposefully narc”). The combination of the two demonstrates we have nothing further to discuss.

I’ve worked with too many amazing SROs to entertain this any further.

Please explain to me how the SROs on site at parkland and uvalde helped?

It's well known that SROs do almost nothing for school safety and in many cases have made matters worse.

Again you keep saying this, but post no evidence of how this applies to Montgomery County, or even Maryland. What incidents in Montgomery County can you refer to in which having the SROs have made matters worse?

It was shown that SROs created many false arrests and provided bad information to investigators. They will no longer be used in this capacity.

Source please? The fact is only 3% of incidents that were handled by SROs in MCPS resulted in an arrest.

That doesn’t count the arrests made by investigators with SRO information..

Also why don’t they publicize how many of those arrests were false?

How is that different from arrests made from teacher/staff/administration information?

Its extra staff in the schools that MCPS isn't paying for as it comes out of police funding not MCPS.

What is your solution? You have yet to give us any. Incidents are up.

The solution is that cops are only called when there is a crime.

When there is no crime (which is 97% of the time) it is referred to MCPS disciplinary proceedings.

That should free cops up for law enforcement.

They are not a concierge service.

So, you have no solution to keeping our kids safe in MCPS. Why wait till a crime happens when it could possibly be prevented? You want your child raped, beaten, etc. when if a SRO was there to prevent it, it could save them from a lot of pain and trauma. Or, are you one of those people with magical thinking that nothing bad could ever happen to you?

Definitely need to keep out the SROs if you are concerned about kid safety. Just can't help but think about Tyre Nichols.

I think this is what it boils down to. Some of the posters don’t want Police trying to build relationship with the community or the kids because the distrust is so high they only see officers trying to take advantage. Other posters see a benefit to officers that know the kids as people not just perps, and see relationships as a way to funnel information to officers to prevent crime (not just to snitch on other kids to get them into trouble). I think the former group feels like you never go to law enforcement unless you really have no choice because the risks of interacting with law enfocrement put weight the be benefits.
I really would love for McPS to do an anonymous survey, linked to student IDs (which also means it could be sorted by school and demographics like the PArc scores) that asked whether parents support SROs in schools. I really would like to see the results of that. I really don’t know what those results would look like. Then they should do the same with teachers and counselors.

I would like to know how many parents had to hire a lawyer for the 97 % of interaction that never needed a cop.

I’d like to know how often SRO’s provided bad info to investigators based on their bias.

DP.
We are still waiting for a poster above to provide that data for us. I’ve asked twice now.

You think mc police and the state’s attorney office will share that.

But you don’t care because it wasn’t your child.

I’m a teacher. I do care about my “children.” I’ve taught over 2,700. I’d care quite deeply to hear if something like this has happened to one of them. Don’t try that character attack on me.

Well it happens and it’s traumatic. It’s literally trauma. What HS are you in that you don’t know this happens.

I don’t discredit the idea this has happened somewhere to someone, and I would agree would be traumatic. Was this in MCPS? Poor behavior on the part of an SRO would NOT be tolerated. I posted a link above that shows how many people one SRO reports to, what type of training they do so they can be sensitive to teen needs, etc.

As for what school, I’m not putting that online. I will say that I’ve seen so many positive interactions. My students have even asked the SRO to sit in on class briefly, or sit with them for a bit at lunch. What I’ve seen is students form strong relationships, and I’ve seen them value the SRO as a trusted adult in the building. I watched one of my 12th graders actively seek him out to talk after a bad weekend. I watched another get excited to see the SRO at his evening game. I have dozens of stories like these. Dozens.

There is no way you can be a teacher at a MS or HS and be this clueless or maybe that is why so many bad things are happening? Kids have been assaulted in MCPS schools. Kids are overdosing. Kids are being bullied. Kids are being raped. Kids are being shamed on social media. And, much more.

So, what are you doing about it as a teacher? Maybe if your students want the SRO in YOUR classroom, it is because they don't feel you are meeting their needs as a teacher or staff member who is supposed to be providing this needs. Why is it a student prefers an SRO over you?

Again with the character attacks! I don’t fall for this. In fact, I teach rhetoric and therefore instruct students how to avoid this. You are not helping your argument by making these juvenile comments.

I am a HS teacher, and have been for many years. Of course I see what you mention. Heck, that’s why I want the old SRO model back! You help me prove my point by showing the increased needs for support in the schools. (Thank you.)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Need petition to bring back -

SROs
Final Exams and mid terms
Driver's Ed
Textbooks
Tracking
Magnet programs based on academic merit
Suspensions
Discipline in the class rooms
Leaving kids who fail behind


We need to get rid of -
Restorative Justice
Fake equity for magnet programs


We need to offer -
Hybrid on-demand
Intensive tutoring for kids who are falling behind
Better special ed.

- We need to have seperate school for "teenagers" who cannot speak English and are illegal immigrants to this county. They should get intensive tutoring in English and literacy to assimilate in society.

- We need metal detectors in each school.

- We need CCTV in the bathrooms and in each school

- All parents must get NARCAN training.
- We need

Who is actually asking for all this? Seriously?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Thanks for the taking points posted by a PP—very helpful. Condensing, it sounds like there are three major differences with the old SRO program:
— CEOs have a designated work station at the HS but are not stationed there (unclear what this means in practice but I’d guess it means they need to at least report to shift at police station)
— ceos not allowed to patrol hallways or respond to school incidents (unclear what that means—if a security officer says “there are kids using drugs in the bathroom and they are refusing to disperse” can the CEO assist?)
— unlike SROs, ceos do not have primary response for arson or drug distribution. Unclear to me who does have primary response for that….McPS security? Principals?
Taking the second two things in combination, it appears that MCPD no longer has any role in making sure kids aren’t using or selling drugs in schools. That seems to me not ideal.

#1 SRO’s had no place to sit so they had to wonder the halls or sit in their car to write a report. Now they have an office.

#2 means that if a teacher is dealing with a disciplinary issue a cop can’t get involved. Often SRO’s would escalate a simple disciplinary issue that teachers were able to handle and teachers did not feel like they could tell a cop to butt out. SROs now only respond to crimes.

#3 arsons are investigated by fire Marshall’s not cops. The Bethesda mag article explains the “drug” response.

#4 no it not true that cops are not involved in drug enforcement for distribution and dangerous drugs. Anything that is a non criminal drug charge in Montgomery County (aka possession of a small amount of pot or paraphernalia ) will now be dealt with by MCPS discipline .

#1. Our SROs always were given a place to work. They walked the halls, but they also had a “home” for work.

#2. SROs did not step in when I was dealing with discipline in my classroom. They didn’t do that to my colleagues, either. Why? Because, as you said, that would escalate the issue and the teacher would loose authority. So, clearly, SROs did not do this. Where are you coming up with this? This isn’t how SROs operated at. all.

I’d love to know where you got these beliefs.

#1 not all schools are the same

#2 most complaints came from teachers in ED classrooms. Are you an ED teacher? I’m glad you agree that SRO’s should not get involved with discipline. That change must please you. It’s explained in the Bethesda magazine article.

Yes, I have worked with ED students in all of my classes. Good attempt at twisting my words, but I can handle discipline in my own classroom while simultaneously being supported by the work of an SRO. There are times I am not equipped to handle a situation, like the weapon that was found in my classroom. I should NOT be expected to handle situations like that, and I should absolutely have the support an an SRO in those cases. The current CEO model doesn’t place the officer close to my classroom, nor does that officer know my children. This is a worse situation. You are welcome to spin it any way you like, of course, but it won’t match my reality nor that of many others with actual experience with SROs.

A weapon would be a crime and a CEO would be involved. CEO’s are in the school and if you have not been given instructions on how to ask for a response you need to reach out to your principal.

How did you call for the SRO?

Quietly simply texted the main office and he was at my door in less than 2 minutes. Since a CEO could be anywhere in a cluster, I doubt I’ll get the same response next time. Also, the SRO already had an established relationship with the student, so the student willingly left the classroom and talked to the trusted officer. A CEO won’t have the same type of relationship.

Again: I come from a place of experience and understanding.

The new model will be that you can call the CEO directly but that part has not been implemented yet.

If you can’t text your front office and get the CEO you should report that. Starting Fall 21 CEO’s were back in schools the same way SRO were. Also students can approach CEO’s if they want. CEO’s are just not allowed to create fake relationship with students to purposely narc on them to investigators they have to live by the same privacy rules teachers do unless it’s a criminal investigation.

Again: I have a very novel experience with security in schools as well as cities, events, sports events, and govt buildings.

You say you have experience with “security,” not with SROs. Your language also shows extreme bias (“fake relationships,” “purposefully narc”). The combination of the two demonstrates we have nothing further to discuss.

I’ve worked with too many amazing SROs to entertain this any further.

Please explain to me how the SROs on site at parkland and uvalde helped?

It's well known that SROs do almost nothing for school safety and in many cases have made matters worse.

Again you keep saying this, but post no evidence of how this applies to Montgomery County, or even Maryland. What incidents in Montgomery County can you refer to in which having the SROs have made matters worse?

It was shown that SROs created many false arrests and provided bad information to investigators. They will no longer be used in this capacity.

Source please? The fact is only 3% of incidents that were handled by SROs in MCPS resulted in an arrest.

That doesn’t count the arrests made by investigators with SRO information..

Also why don’t they publicize how many of those arrests were false?

How is that different from arrests made from teacher/staff/administration information?

Its extra staff in the schools that MCPS isn't paying for as it comes out of police funding not MCPS.

What is your solution? You have yet to give us any. Incidents are up.

The solution is that cops are only called when there is a crime.

When there is no crime (which is 97% of the time) it is referred to MCPS disciplinary proceedings.

That should free cops up for law enforcement.

They are not a concierge service.

So, you have no solution to keeping our kids safe in MCPS. Why wait till a crime happens when it could possibly be prevented? You want your child raped, beaten, etc. when if a SRO was there to prevent it, it could save them from a lot of pain and trauma. Or, are you one of those people with magical thinking that nothing bad could ever happen to you?

Definitely need to keep out the SROs if you are concerned about kid safety. Just can't help but think about Tyre Nichols.

I think this is what it boils down to. Some of the posters don’t want Police trying to build relationship with the community or the kids because the distrust is so high they only see officers trying to take advantage. Other posters see a benefit to officers that know the kids as people not just perps, and see relationships as a way to funnel information to officers to prevent crime (not just to snitch on other kids to get them into trouble). I think the former group feels like you never go to law enforcement unless you really have no choice because the risks of interacting with law enfocrement put weight the be benefits.
I really would love for McPS to do an anonymous survey, linked to student IDs (which also means it could be sorted by school and demographics like the PArc scores) that asked whether parents support SROs in schools. I really would like to see the results of that. I really don’t know what those results would look like. Then they should do the same with teachers and counselors.

I would like to know how many parents had to hire a lawyer for the 97 % of interaction that never needed a cop.

I’d like to know how often SRO’s provided bad info to investigators based on their bias.

DP.
We are still waiting for a poster above to provide that data for us. I’ve asked twice now.

You think mc police and the state’s attorney office will share that.

But you don’t care because it wasn’t your child.

I’m a teacher. I do care about my “children.” I’ve taught over 2,700. I’d care quite deeply to hear if something like this has happened to one of them. Don’t try that character attack on me.

Well it happens and it’s traumatic. It’s literally trauma. What HS are you in that you don’t know this happens.

I don’t discredit the idea this has happened somewhere to someone, and I would agree would be traumatic. Was this in MCPS? Poor behavior on the part of an SRO would NOT be tolerated. I posted a link above that shows how many people one SRO reports to, what type of training they do so they can be sensitive to teen needs, etc.

As for what school, I’m not putting that online. I will say that I’ve seen so many positive interactions. My students have even asked the SRO to sit in on class briefly, or sit with them for a bit at lunch. What I’ve seen is students form strong relationships, and I’ve seen them value the SRO as a trusted adult in the building. I watched one of my 12th graders actively seek him out to talk after a bad weekend. I watched another get excited to see the SRO at his evening game. I have dozens of stories like these. Dozens.

Genuine question: was there something about this person being an LEO that you think was integral to the students liking him? Would/could the same positive interactions occurred if it was an extra counselor or other admin?

^^^ This.

It’s such a bizarre notion that these students can’t find one person in the whole school to talk to about their bad weekend. What is up with that? That’s a serious problem.

I'm the PP who posed the question...and I want to clarify that it was, in fact, genuine. I wasn't making a point, I was seeking that posters thoughts.