Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2022-0707 (2) CityClerk From:CityClerk Sent:Monday, August 15, 2022 5:54 PM To:Bolinger, Bonnie; Pennington, Blake; Brown, Chris; Bunch, Sarah; CityClerk; Curth, Jonathan; Harvey, Sonia; Hertzberg, Holly; Batker, Jodi; Jones, D'Andre; Kelley, Courtney; Kinion, Mark; Johnson, Kimberly; Rogers, Kristin; Williams, Kit; Jordan, Lioneld; Mathis, Jeana; Paxton, Kara; Mulford, Patti; Rea, Christine; Scroggin, Sloan; Norton, Susan; Thurber, Lisa; Turk, Teresa; Wiederkehr, Mike Cc:kyle.smith@kyle4fay.org Subject:FW: Vote AGAINST C5 - School Resource Officers: 2022-0707 Attachments:Presence of Armed School Officials and Fatal and Nonfatal Gunshot Injuries During Mass School Shootings, United States (2021).pdf; Patrolling Public Schools The Impact of Funding for School Police on Student Discipline and Long-Term Education Outcomes (2018).pdf; The Thin Blue Line in Schools New Evidence on School-Based Policing Across the U.S. (2021).pdf.pdf Hello, This comment will be archived on the City of Fayetteville's website under the Agenda Public Comments for the City Council meeting date that your comment corresponds with. This comment will not be displayed in the agenda item packet. Please see the link below for your convenience. http://documents.fayetteville-ar.gov/WebLink/Browse.aspx?id=9096659&dbid=0&repo=COF As a courtesy future reference, if you have a comment about a City Council agenda item, you may email your comment directly to the City Council and Mayor at: agendaitemcomment@fayetteville- ar.gov Thank you. Office of the City Clerk Treasurer 113 W. Mountain Street, Suite 308 Fayetteville, AR 72701 479.575.8323 cityclerk@fayetteville-ar.gov Website | Facebook | Twitter | YouTube From: Kyle Smith <kyle.smith@kyle4fay.org> Sent: Sunday, August 14, 2022 4:31 PM To: CityClerk <cityclerk@fayetteville-ar.gov>; Mayor <Mayor@fayetteville-ar.gov>; Gutierrez, Sonia <sonia@voteforsoniag.com>; Jones, D'Andre <dandre.jones@fayetteville-ar.gov>; Kinion, Mark <mark.kinion@fayetteville-ar.gov>; Wiederkehr, Mike <mike.wiederkehr@fayetteville-ar.gov>; Scroggin, Sloan <sloan.scroggin@fayetteville-ar.gov>; Bunch, Sarah <sarah.bunch@fayetteville-ar.gov>; Turk, Teresa <teresa.turk@fayetteville-ar.gov> Subject: Vote AGAINST C5 - School Resource Officers 1 CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the City of Fayetteville. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. City Clerk: Please include the attachments in the public record for future reference during debate. Dear Mayor & Council Members: The justification attached to agenda item C5 is very straightforward: Because the Law Enforcement and Security Subcommittee of the Governor's School Safety Commission said we should. One might have expected the recent events in Uvalde, TX to have resulted in updated recommendations from this group, but instead they simply reiterated the same goals previously stated in their 2018 report. No substantial support is given to justify these recommendations, and I hope you will take a very sceptical eye to the suggestion from a group dominated by law enforcement officers that you dramatically increase public spending on law enforcement activities. School safety is the highest-stakes policy-making and it should be based in reality, not in wishful thinking. It should be based on facts, not on fear. It should be supported by the best academic data we have to understand the problem. You have already received two lengthy emails from me today with policy analysis on other issues, so this time I will spare you my opinions. Instead, you will find below a collection of scholarly articles with excerpts and links to full-text where available. The best fact-based research I can find overwhelmingly indicates a vote against a dramatic expansion of school-based policing into lower grades. As you decide what's best for the safety of ALL Fayetteville students, I hope you will demand a similarly rigorous review from advocates in favor of this dangerous and wasteful policy proposal. Perhaps they've found something I haven't. SROs are Ineffective School Shooting Prevention    Sorensen,  Lucy C., Montserrat Avila Acosta, John Engberg, and Shawn D. Bushway. (2021).  The Thin Blue Line in Schools: New Evidence on School-Based Policing Across the U.S.. (EdWorkingPaper: 21-476). Retrieved from Annenberg Institute at Brown University:  https://doi.org/10.26300/heqx-rc69  o o o Abstract Excerpt: o    We find that  SROs do effectively reduce some forms of violence in schools,  but do not prevent school shootings or gun-related incidents.  We also find that SROs intensify the use of suspensions,  expulsions, police referrals, and arrests of students. These effects are consistently over  two times larger for Black students than White students. Finally, we observe that SROs increase chronic absenteeism, particularly for students with disabilities. 2  SROs Worsen School Shooting Severity    Peterson  J, Densley J, Erickson G. Presence of Armed School Officials and Fatal and Nonfatal Gunshot Injuries During Mass School Shootings, United States, 1980-2019.  JAMA Netw Open.  2021;4(2):e2037394.  doi:10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2020.37394  o o o Article Excerpts: o    armed guards were not associated with significant reduction in rates of injuries; in fact, controlling  for the aforementioned factors of location and school characteristics, the  rate of deaths was 2.83 times greater in schools with an armed guard  present     the data suggest  no association between having an armed officer and deterrence  of violence in these cases. An  armed officer on the scene was the number one factor associated  with increased casualties after the perpetrators’ use of assault rifles or submachine guns.  SROs are Ineffective School Crime Prevention & Contribute to the Criminalization of Minor Youthful Offenses    Gottfredson, Denise C., et al. “Effects of School Resource Officers on School Crime and Responses  to School Crime.” Criminology & Public Policy, vol. 19, no. 3, Aug. 2020,  pp. 905–40. EBSCOhost, https://doi.org/10.1111/1745-9133.12512.  o o o Abstract Excerpt: o 3    We found that increased SROs increased the number of drug‐ and weapon‐related offenses and exclusionary  disciplinary actions for treatment schools relative to comparison schools. These negative effects were more frequently found for students without special needs. Policy Implications:  The study findings suggest that increasing SROs does not  improve school safety and that by increasing exclusionary responses to school discipline incidents it increases the criminalization of school discipline.  We recommend that educational decision‐makers seeking to  enhance school safety consider the many alternatives to programs that require regular police presence  in schools     Brown, Benjamin (2018)  “Evaluations of School Policing Programs in the U.S,” in Deakin et al. (eds.) The Palgrave International Handbook of School Discipline, Surveillance and Social Control, London: Palgrave-Macmillan  o o o Abstract Excerpt: o    One of the most consistent findings is that  students, teachers, and administrators view SROs favorably.  Research also suggests, however, that SROs frequently treat  student misconduct as criminal/delinquent activity resulting in the diversion of youths from the education system into the justice system.  It is unclear whether SROs enhance student safety.     Crawford,  Charles, and Ronald Burns (2015)  “Preventing School Violence: Assessing armed guardians, school policy, and context.” Policing: An international journal of police strategies & management 38: 631-647;  o o o Abstract Excerpt: o    Findings revealed  mixed and often counterproductive  results for law enforcement and school security efforts to control school violence.  School characteristics, such as reports of bullying, location, and gang activity yielded numerous statistically significant findings. This study differs from much of the previous literature, which typically examines student and administrator attitudes about  victimization and crime prevention. The current study examines detailed information on the actual effects of school violence prevention efforts. Furthermore, this study moves beyond most other works (that typically focus on high schools) as it considers school 4  safety approaches by different grade levels.  o o o Findings Excerpts: o    Among the law enforcement measures, for the dependent variable reports of serious violence,  the number of security guards and guards in uniform was associated with a significant  increase in reports serious violence in high schools, SROs, and the number guards in uniform were also positively  associated with reports of serious violence in other grade levels. For the armed guardian  variables, reports of serious violence were significantly higher in schools where security possessed firearms, and  OC spray. (PDF Page 12)     Among the law enforcement security measures, the  number of SROs and security guards were positively related to a higher incidence of  threatened attack with weapon in high schools. The number of security guards and guards in uniform were positively  associated with the incidence of a threatened weapon attack in the other grade levels. There were two statistically significant findings for armed guardians in high schools. Threatened weapon attacks were significantly higher in schools with armed security  for both grade levels. Interestingly, threatened weapon attacks were lower in high  schools where security carried OC spray (b ¼ −0.35, po0.05) and in other grade levels where they carried Tasers (b  ¼ −0.49, po0.05). (PDF Page 13)     Na,  Chongmin, and Denise Gottfredson. (2013)  “Police Officers in Schools: Effects on School Crime and the Processing of Offending Behaviors,” Justice Quarterly 30: 619-650;  o o o Abstract: o    The use of police in schools has increased dramatically in the past 12 years, largely due to increases  in US Department of Justice funding. This study used data from the School Survey on Crime and Safety to assess the extent to which the addition of police in schools is associated with changes in levels of school crime and schools responses to crime. We found  that as schools increase their use of police, they record more crimes involving weapon and drugs and report a higher percentage of their non-serious violent crimes to law enforcement. The possibility that placement of police officers in schools increases referrals 5  to law enforcement for crimes of a less serious nature and increases recording of weapon and drug offenses requires that more rigorous research be carried out to assess more carefully the school climate and school safety outcomes related to this popular and  costly practice.  SROs Depress Graduation Rates & Student Achievement    Weisburst,  E.K. (2019), Patrolling Public Schools: The Impact of Funding for School Police on Student Discipline and Long-term Education Outcomes. J. Pol. Anal. Manage., 38: 338-365.  https://doi.org/10.1002/pam.22116  o o o Abstract Excerpt: o    This project provides the first quasi-experimental estimate of funding for  school police on student outcomes, leveraging variation in federal Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS) grants and detailed data on students from the Texas Education Research Center (ERC). The rise in discipline is driven by sanctions for low- level  offenses or school code of conduct violations. Findings  from the study reveal that receiving federal funding for school police in Texas increases disciplinary rates for middle school students by 6%  but does not change high school disciplinary rates. There is also suggestive  evidence that exposure to a three-year  federal grant for school police decreases high school graduation rates by approximately 2.5% and college enrollment rates by 4%.  SROs’ Have Mixed Impact on School Culture & Student Connectedness    Theriot, Matthew T. “The Impact of School Resource Officer Interaction on Students’ Feelings About  School and School Police.” Crime & Delinquency, vol. 62, no. 4, Apr. 2016, pp. 446–69. EBSCOhost,  https://doi.org/10.1177/0011128713503526.  o o o Abstract Excerpt: o 6    Multivariate analyses showed that more  SRO interactions increased students’ positive attitudes about SROs yet decreased school connectedness.  Overall, the results suggested a complex relationship between SRO interactions, students’ attitudes, and experiences with school violence.  Robb Elementary School - Uvalde, TX Other Non-Research Reporting (because it’s a lot more digestible) Schools are safer than they were in the 90s, and school shootings are not more common than they used to be, researchers say (2018) Do Armed Guards Prevent School Shootings? (2019) Armed campus police do not prevent school shootings, research shows (2022) SRO Who Allegedly Hid During Parkland School Shooting Faces Criminal Charges (2022) Uvalde report: 376 officers but ‘egregiously poor’ decisions (2022) Students of color push back on calls for police in schools (2022) The Risks and Benefits of School Police: Black and Latino Parents Weigh In (2022) A Better Path Forward for Criminal Justice (2021) Kyle Smith kyle.smith@kyle4fay.org 479.274.8881 Facebook | Twitter | Website 7